SHOULD RIOTS BE ALLOWED? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

SHOULD RIOTS BE ALLOWED?
in Politics

By agirlwithfactsagirlwithfacts 9 Pts edited June 20
To a certain extent, I agree with the riots but I want to know if there is a better way to go around it
piloteerMyCatIsCute
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • @agirlwithfacts ;
    I have a better way:

    Don't hurt people who have nothing to do with the problems and you won't be seen as a pariah.

    Rioting in no way accomplishes the goals of the movement, and does a whole lot to legitimize force against it.

    I mean, exactly what part of rioting is logically sound and actually does any good? What do you even agree with? Do you think that sometimes force is necessary for change? Or that the people being attacked deserve it somehow? Is this Justice or just crime?
    piloteerall4acttZeusAres42
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    edited June 20
    @agirlwithfacts

    Not to say riots should be "allowed", but I disagree that rioting actually somehow hurts the cause  associated with the riots. Cities all over the country are taking funds away from policing where non-emergency services can be used instead of the police. It would be eye opening to see how many people actually sympathize with the ideal of the riots, even many on he right. There were even sympathy protests in France. Nobody is in love with riots, or even particularly like them, but a cause needs to be addressed and there's no denying the impact of the riots and how it has made policing the most prominent issue as of this moment going into an election, and it wouldn't be surprising to see some trump supporters who are at least sympathetic with the ideals of the riots, and they have an understanding that the policy of policing in the US needs addressing and not just lip service. Nothing does more than pointing out how an issue is only ever relocated to lip service more so than a riot.     

    Unlike others on this thread, "I do think sometimes force is necessary for change". Nobody likes it, but it is sometimes needed. John Lennon wrote attica state in which he openly called for force against the so called "justice system" in the US. Remember, John Lennon is Mr. Imagine, the walrus, koo koo ka choo, love and peace. Even he knew sometimes we need struggle. Neil Young wrote Ohio where he openly called for force against what he saw as a corrupt presidential administration and it became a top ten hit. Mr. Hippy grampa granola called for open revolution against tin soldiers cutting us down. Even he understood sometimes we need force.

    Malcom X said war is disgusting and should only ever be used last. But regardless of the fact that it is the last option on the table that should ever be used, it should still always be an option on the table. If you have an enemy who understands that you are unwilling to use force, all they have to do is use force against you, and you and your cause will be neutralized. Ghandi and his "peaceful" resistance did achieve the cause it was associated with, but don't be fooled into thinking that cause was totally without some rioting, and even much struggle on the part of the Indian population. When British soldiers shot down unarmed men women and children, it gave Britain a black eye as far as public opinion goes. But what do you think would have happened if the Indian population were to go up against a government that didn't care about their public image, like China? Chinese soldiers would have continued to cut down unarmed civilians  without any care about looking like an authoritative meany. 

    Just like Malcom X said, struggle (rioting, or force) should only ever be used as the absolute last option on the table. But it should still be on the table, and sometimes the only way to struggle against a tyrannical "authority" like say, the Chinese government, or the US "justice system"  is to use force. John Lennon called for force against a corrupt justice system, but that never happened and we all just let it continue as it is, until now of course. We must be willing to struggle and use force,  and you must also know when that time has come. Louis Farrakhan: "It seems when it comes time for us to stand up, we find a convenient excuse to lay down. [Don't] back away from struggle!!!!"          
    left_libertarian001JustAnAllMightFan
  • @piloteer ;
    piloteer said:
    @agirlwithfacts

    Not to say riots should be "allowed", but I disagree that rioting actually somehow hurts the cause  associated with the riots. Cities all over the country are taking funds away from policing where non-emergency services can be used instead of the police. It would be eye opening to see how many people actually sympathize with the ideal of he riots, even many on he right. Nobody is in love with riots, or even particularly like them, but a cause needs to be addressed and there's no denying the impact of the riots and how it has made policing the most prominent issue as of this moment going into an election, and it wouldn't be surprising to see some trump supporters who are at least sympathetic with the ideals of the riots, and they have an understanding that the policy of policing in the US needs addressing and not just lip service. Nothing does more than pointing out how an issue is only ever relocated to lip service more so than a riot.     
    How do you know that was due to the riots, and not the peaceful protests?
    piloteerall4actt
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    edited June 20
    @Happy_Killbot

    Perhaps it's only speculation as to whether sympathy for the cause of the riots is directly correlated with the rioting itself. But leave us not forget that those riots were not an undertaking of a foreign entity. And most certainly leave us not forget that those riots were an undertaking of ALL factions of American society. Whether you or I were there, our respective faction of society was represented there. Those riots were a coming together of factions of society who may have other overlapping issues with each other, yet they came together in unity with a common cause. Those riots were an undertaking of American society, and the angers and frustrations of ALL factions of American society were openly on display in those riots. 

    Given those facts, and the obvious frustration that many Americans have with, the current administration, the policing in the US, the justice system in the US, or even just the current state of events on a more broad basis, how do you know that many of the frustrations of the American public were not being represented in those riots?         
  • @piloteer ;
    Perhaps it's only speculation as to whether sympathy for the cause of the riots is directly correlated with the rioting itself.
    wat?

    Is that a typo or are you trying to say that the cause of the riots isn't what caused the riots?
    But leave us not forget that those riots were not an undertaking of a foreign entity. And most certainly leave us not forget that those riots were an undertaking of ALL factions of American society.
    This is simply not true, the rioting was perpetrated by a very small minority of people. On top of this, in order for you to claim that "all factions of American society" were the perpetrators, you would need to show some hard evidence, and if I can find just one group that was not associated, then the claim is dead in the water.
    Whether you or I were there, our respective faction of society was represented there. 
    I have no association with any of the rioters. If I did, these people would be immediately exposed for their crimes such that justice can be served.
     Those riots were a coming together of factions of society who may have other overlapping issues with each other, yet they came together in unity with a common cause.
    That cause being destruction and theft?
    Those riots were an undertaking of American society, and the angers and frustrations of ALL factions of American society were openly on display in those riots. 
    That sounds more like an opinion than an objective fact. Again, if I can find one faction which is not associated (which is trivial) then the claim is dead in the water.
    Given those facts, and the obvious frustration that many Americans have with, the current administration, the policing in the US, the justice system in the US, or even just the current state of events on a more broad basis, how do you know that many of the frustrations of the American public were not being represented in those riots?         
    That's simple: Not everyone rioted.

    In order for us to say (or even claim) that the frustrations of the American people were represented here, we would have to show that everyone's gripes and complains were somehow on display. Since only a very small minority of people participated, not everyone expressed their frustrations. Therefore it follows logically that not all the frustrations of the American people were represented.

    If you are still unconvinced, consider this: Did the Charlottesville "unite the right" rally represent your frustrations with America? I could use your same argument to claim that they did, but if you disagree then you can not hold on to this same argument. 
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @Happy_Killbot

    So do you have proof the riots were perpetrated by a foreign entity or an inside agitator faction of society? It seems like you're claiming that it would be so simple to prove that the riots were not perpetrated by US citizens, or only a single faction of society, yet you did no foot work on your claim and have no proof that the riots were not the work of all factions of American society. Alright then, which specific minority of society was it who started the riots? 
    Happy_Killbot
  • @piloteer ;
    piloteer said:
    @Happy_Killbot

    So do you have proof the riots were perpetrated by a foreign entity or an inside agitator faction of society? It seems like you're claiming that it would be so simple to prove that the riots were not perpetrated by US citizens, or only a single faction of society, yet you did no foot work on your claim and have no proof that the riots were not the work of all factions of American society. Alright then, which specific minority of society was it who started the riots? 
    I am not claiming they were perpetrated by an external agency.
    I am denying your claim that any action executed by any American represents all Americans.

    I am not claiming that a single specific minority group was responsible for the riots
    I am claiming that the riots were executed by a minority (meaning a small number) of Americans.

    You are shifting the burden of proof by asking me to disprove that all factions were represented, since you made a positive claim you must back that claim with facts.
    I do have the burden of proof to show that not all factions were present, but doing so is trivial. All I have to do is show that riots didn't happen in every town and city, and then show that in any of those cities there is at least one faction unique to that city.

    Easy day.

    No riots in Sata Fe:
    https://www.abqjournal.com/1461021/peaceful-protest-in-santa-fe-draws-hundreds-carrying-signs-singing-ex-the-moment-we-quit-is-the-moment-they-win-said-one-of-the-protesters.html

    No riots at the office:
    https://www.pahomepage.com/news/dozens-come-out-to-support-racial-justice/

    Despite police aggression, no riots in Litte Rock:
    https://katv.com/news/local/protests-in-little-rock-took-a-dark-turn-on-sunday-as-police-used-tear-gas-to-clear-crowds

    Any single one of these is sufficient to disprove your claim. The rioters do not represent all Americans, they do not represent me, and they do not help the cause they claim to support, in fact they hurt it severely. Besides, if you are okay with riots pushing changes you agree with, then in order to make things fair you must support riots pushing changes you do not agree with.

    Would you find it acceptable for white supremacist to riot in order to push for explicitly racist policies?

    If you say "no" then you are a hypocrite.

    if you say "yes" then that means you agree that white supremacists can represent you via violent action.
    AlofRIall4actt
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Riots are sometimes needed. Everything doesn't come hand in hand with peace. When your grievances are unheard of I think riots might do it. At least in Indian history there are many instances to prove that sometimes riots are needed.
    piloteer
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • AlofRIAlofRI 732 Pts
    Riots have their place. Hungary would have stayed communist for years longer if not for riots, The Berlin Wall was a trigger for many riots. It's hard to say, but, riots have led to freedom for many people. Was it MLK that said something like ... Riots are the language of the oppressed ... something like that. Anyway, we don't like them, but, sometimes they are the ONLY way a point gets across! A sometimes "necessary evil".

    Many "riots" spring from a legitimate protest. Unfortunate, but human. Just like murder can spring from a domestic argument. We human's can only take so much before the animal in us is triggered. Some "triggers" are unacceptable, some are undeniable ... like freedom.
    MyCatIsCute
  • AlofRI said:
    Riots have their place. Hungary would have stayed communist for years longer if not for riots, The Berlin Wall was a trigger for many riots. It's hard to say, but, riots have led to freedom for many people. Was it MLK that said something like ... Riots are the language of the oppressed ... something like that. Anyway, we don't like them, but, sometimes they are the ONLY way a point gets across! A sometimes "necessary evil".

    Many "riots" spring from a legitimate protest. Unfortunate, but human. Just like murder can spring from a domestic argument. We human's can only take so much before the animal in us is triggered. Some "triggers" are unacceptable, some are undeniable ... like freedom.
    Agreed...
    MyCatIsCute
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @AlofRI ;@ScienceRules ;
    You are misunderstanding MLK's quote, he was very much against riots.

    https://time.com/3838515/baltimore-riots-language-unheard-quote/
    AlofRIMyCatIsCute
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    Riots are sometimes needed. Everything doesn't come hand in hand with peace. When your grievances are unheard of I think riots might do it. At least in Indian history there are many instances to prove that sometimes riots are needed.
    Okay, so is it acceptable for white supremacists to riot in order to get what they want?

    After all, it is their subjective opinion that what is "needed" is white supremacy. How is this different from your subjective opinions?
    piloteerScienceRulesMyCatIsCute
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @Happy_Killbot

    So was that small number of Americans who started the riots only poor black males? Were the riots only perpetrated by rich white women? Were they done by the middle class over 65 crowd? Were they all communists, or anarchists? Was every single one of them a non-supporter of trump? Or do you think that perhaps it was a very diverse group? Even white supremacists hate authority. 

    If white supremacists used force to push their agenda, those who sit back and let it happen for the sake of peace deserve everything that happens to them. In my opinion, those who do nothing do not deserve death, but instead a long life of servitude to their sworn enemy.    
  • @piloteer ;
    So was that small number of Americans who started the riots only poor black males? Were the riots only perpetrated by rich white women? Were they done by the middle class over 65 crowd? Were they all communists, or anarchists? Was every single one of them a non-supporter of trump? Or do you think that perhaps it was a very diverse group? Even white supremacists hate authority. 
    Homogeneity is not a requirement for my claim to be true.
    If white supremacists used force to push their agenda, those who sit back and let it happen for the sake of peace deserve everything that happens to them. In my opinion, those who do nothing do not deserve death, but instead a long life of servitude to their sworn enemy.    
    So then White supremacists and police unions, who openly disagree with the changes being suggested should attack the protesters?

    This kind of mindless rhetoric is how civil wars start. Is that your goal? The only thing that can possibly come out of that is that the US turns into a legitimately fascist state.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @Happy_Killbot

    So do you think we should just let the white supremacists continue with their use of force while we sit back and let it happen? At what point is your endless resolve for peace broken, and you finally understand you are the one being pushed by an aggressor who will stop at nothing to force you to capitulate or die, or do you just go with flow like the German population did in the 1930s?

    There's a reason the FBI considers the far right to be the most dangerous terrorist threat the US faces today. They have a perfect mission plan. They just go around committing mass shootings as individual lone wolf attacks, while all the rest of them say that person wasn't associated with them. Now they have a legitimate major party that panders to their every need. But I'm sure you can use your superior gift of logistics and engage them, and talk them out of their silly conquest of the western world?!?!?

    I envy your endless devotion to peace. Shame on me for recognizing the far right movement for what it is. An aggressive militant group bent on destroying democracy and implementing neo-nazi rule just like it was written in the Turner diaries. You are really good at finding a convenient excuse to lay down when it comes time to stand up!!!     

    Happy_Killbot
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @ScienceRules ;
    Riots are sometimes needed. Everything doesn't come hand in hand with peace. When your grievances are unheard of I think riots might do it. At least in Indian history there are many instances to prove that sometimes riots are needed.
    Okay, so is it acceptable for white supremacists to riot in order to get what they want?

    After all, it is their subjective opinion that what is "needed" is white supremacy. How is this different from your subjective opinions?
    Did the German people do the right thing in the 1930s by letting a violent minority party gain control of the countries economic system, media outlets, police and military force, and entire government? Or do you think that if they had a second chance to do it over, they should not resist the nazis and stay devoted to peace at all costs?

    Ignoring a nazi=being a nazi!!!

    Resisting a nazi=being a hero!!!!  
  • @piloteer ;
    In case you are not aware, or for some reason could not tell because of screen name, I am not exactly committed to "peace"

    In case you haven't figured it out yet, I don't support internal unrest because it could be resolved peacefully, and many of the demands and proposals being thrown around I find  disorganized if not completely unacceptable. I don't care if it comes from white supremacists, neo-liberals, antifa, conservatives, liberals, BLM, Marxists, libertarians, socialists, feminists, or any individual. If it is violent internal conflict, I don't support it because it is not conducive to society.

    The point that I am making here that you don't seem to be grasping, is that if you are okay with a specific group rioting or committing mass shootings then it stands to reason that either you must be okay with everyone doing it, or else you have double standards. If you are okay with anyone rioting, then I can show that this is objectively bad for society in that it tends to cause breakdown of that society, which isn't good for anyone except those interests looking to see our demise.

    Furthermore, you have to understand that rioting is an excellent way to ensure that fascist "strong men" rise up and impose their will in order to restore order. If by some stroke of luck, the opposition wins, then the US is effectively reduced in its global standing and position as the leader of the free world, and either way the CCP will essentially be the closest winner. That has huge implications for our planet and our species, because it means that basically no matter what liberalism can not win.

    This isn't how you push change, this isn't a justified conflict, this is opportunistic BS that is contrary to US values and institutions. The rioters aren't even looking for change, they are just looking for violence and are using the protests as an excuse to loot and riot. That's all they wanted.
    all4actt
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @Happy_Killbot

    Maybe you're not committed to peace, but instead paralyzed by a fear of conflict. Out of all the different political factions that you listed, one stands alone, while the others can find a peaceful solution to all their differences, or at least they can learn to live together peacefully. The alt-right is the one faction that stands alone and does not have any intention of peaceful resolution. All the other factors have a common enemy, and they combined are the enemy of the alt-right. 

    So you are not associated with the rioters in any manner, yet you know exactly what their mind frame was, and biased policing was not the reason they did what they did, and you know that how???? So I guess the ideal of "not yo mamas revolution" is really only a justification for rioting to you instead of the youths recognition that peaceful protests of the 60s accomplished zero.

    I know you're not as shallow as your argument makes you seem. You paint a picture of society as either devout  Buddhist monks opposed to any manner of violence, or aggressive fascist Vikings who want to rape and pillage anybody they don't know. You know we are far more nuanced than that. You also know that we are not automatically war mongers simply because we want to resist the aggressive fascist militants that are very real and very much want to be those Vikings I spoke of. The French resistance weren't war mongering Vikings, they were resistance fighters who were struggling for their freedom. 

    I'm certainly not OK with the acts of war waged by the alt-right, but I'm most certainly OK with responding to them with acts of war.       

            
  • @piloteer ;
    Maybe you're not committed to peace, but instead paralyzed by a fear of conflict. Out of all the different political factions that you listed, one stands alone, while the others can find a peaceful solution to all their differences, or at least they can learn to live together peacefully. The alt-right is the one faction that stands alone and does not have any intention of peaceful resolution. All the other factors have a common enemy, and they combined are the enemy of the alt-right. 
    I call shenanigans. Every single one of those ideologies has been responsible for some ideological conflict on US soil at some point and time. You are out touch with reality to think that only one has been violent.
    So you are not associated with the rioters in any manner, yet you know exactly what their mind frame was, and biased policing was not the reason they did what they did, and you know that how???? So I guess the ideal of "not yo mamas revolution" is really only a justification for rioting to you instead of the youths recognition that peaceful protests of the 60s accomplished zero.
    Honestly, I wish people would drop the charade already. If the riots were about police violence, then why attack private interests?

    I judge not based on words, because words are cheap. I look at action, because it is exceptionally difficult to lie through action. Anyone who riots is clearly not interested in a free country which is conducive to civilization.
    I know you're not as shallow as your argument makes you seem. You paint a picture of society as either devout  Buddhist monks opposed to any manner of violence, or aggressive fascist Vikings who want to rape and pillage anybody they don't know. You know we are far more nuanced than that. You also know that we are not automatically war mongers simply because we want to resist the aggressive fascist militants that are very real and very much want to be those Vikings I spoke of. The French resistance weren't war mongering Vikings, they were resistance fighters who were struggling for their freedom. 
    No idea how you are getting that out of what I am saying, honestly it just seems like you are grasping at straws here. Keep in mind that the French revolution directly contributed to the rise of Napoleon and French nationalism, exactly what I am suggesting would happen if riots become the primary method for change.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteerpiloteer 839 Pts
    @Happy_Killbot

    When and where did you read that I said riots should be the primary method of change? I never said anything of the sort, and I never would. I totally agree that rioting can be counterproductive at times, but this time they were not. There's a myriad of bills now calling for better training of the police, and stricter policies of conduct especially when it comes to engaging the public. Cities across the country are talking about defunding their police force. Private businesses are openly expressing their sympathy and commitment to BLM. Fox has taken cops off the air. There are people even calling for paw patrol to get taken off the air. I do not see a backlash because of the riots here, but instead a commitment to the cause. An understanding that we all just used empty words of change before, now there's a true push for action. 

    The French revolution was a disaster, but the American revolution didn't cause the same paranoia and social discontent. So we're going to lump "ideological conflict" in with tyrannical war mongering now. Ideological conflict comes with the territory when free speech and acceptance of other cultures are ideals we embrace. Obvious there's a world of difference between an ideological conflict, and an act of war. Since when has there been a mass shooting in the name of women's rights? I can't remember any instances of a neo-liberal shooting up a mall or a synagogue. When was the last time an abortion clinic was terrorised in the name of black lives matters? 

    The rioters also hit several cop cars, and even burned down a precinct by the way. 
          
  • @piloteer ;
    When and where did you read that I said riots should be the primary method of change? I never said anything of the sort, and I never would. I totally agree that rioting can be counterproductive at times, but this time they were not. 
    The title of the debate is "SHOULD RIOTS BE ALLOWED?"
    There's a myriad of bills now calling for better training of the police, and stricter policies of conduct especially when it comes to engaging the public. Cities across the country are talking about defunding their police force. Private businesses are openly expressing their sympathy and commitment to BLM. Fox has taken cops off the air. There are people even calling for paw patrol to get taken off the air. I do not see a backlash because of the riots here, but instead a commitment to the cause. An understanding that we all just used empty words of change before, now there's a true push for action. 
    Defunding the police is madness, but as I said before you don't have any reason to think that the riots are the primary driver of change, as it seems more likely that peaceful protesting is much more responsible. In this way, there is no reason that rioting should be accepted in society.

    P.S. the paw patrol thing is a troll. It's not happening.
    The French revolution was a disaster, but the American revolution didn't cause the same paranoia and social discontent. So we're going to lump "ideological conflict" in with tyrannical war mongering now. Ideological conflict comes with the territory when free speech and acceptance of other cultures are ideals we embrace. Obvious there's a world of difference between an ideological conflict, and an act of war. Since when has there been a mass shooting in the name of women's rights? I can't remember any instances of a neo-liberal shooting up a mall or a synagogue. When was the last time an abortion clinic was terrorised in the name of black lives matters? 
    So naive...

    Information warfare is just as much a conflict as kinetic warfare, inundating a country with your own propaganda as what Putin did to aid the Trump campaign is an act of war, and frankly it is just as dangerous if not more dangerous in many ways. Inciting civil unrest is just as bad for a country as open conflict.

    Feminist terrorism in the US:
    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1980s-far-left-female-led-domestic-terrorism-group-bombed-us-capitol-180973904/

    Planned parenthood doesn't support BLM:
    https://illinoisrighttolife.org/three-reasons-why-planned-parenthood-does-not-support-the-black-lives-matter-movement/
    There is a conspiracy theory that PP is explicitly eugenicist, so while I can't find any specific examples of the BLM movement attacking a PP, I wouldn't be surprised.

    Then there are the neo-liberals, perhaps the worst on the list by far. Since they have a controlling majority in both major parties, they technically have had a monopoly on violence since their inception. They are the reason for increased prison populations, police quotas, and yes, legally approved raids on malls and mosques including deaths. In fact, everything that this movement stands against is explicitly a consequence of neo-liberal policies. Yet most Americans can't even describe it!
    The rioters also hit several cop cars, and even burned down a precinct by the way. 
    The people who did that should be held accountable. As a taxpayer, I can't have a**holes breaking stuff that I have to pay for.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @Happy_Killbot i don't support white supremacy. I just said that sometimes rioting is necessary.
    Happy_Killbot
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • Asher34Asher34 99 Pts
    To all of you who support or condone violent riots you also support killing of cops and other innocent people to further your political movement of black supremacy . Defunding Police is not going to solve theses issues in fact it may make it so worse police are now on the street because the funding they might use for training is now going to unarmed social workers to deal with violent people. No American citizen should be above the law what BLM wants is for black violent criminals to not be held accountable in any way. in 2019 more unarmed white people were killed by police . Did you see white people rioting and acting a fool burning things? I am all for people being free to actually protest peacefully. Once you start burning cars looting stores assaulting people and attacking police  my sympathy for your movement is gone. 
    Happy_Killbot
  • @Asher34
    Well yes so much violence wasn't really needed.
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    @Happy_Killbot i don't support white supremacy. I just said that sometimes rioting is necessary.
    Actually, you are. Let me make a little logical proposition:

    you claim: "rioting is sometimes necessary"

    Premise 1: sometimes we ought to riot out of necessity,
    Some laws, social institutions, and basic human decency forbid rioting.
    Therefore, anything which forbids rioting ought to be removed so that people can riot out of necessity.

    If there is nothing which forbids rioting, then anyone can riot out of necessity.
    Therefore, if you think that rioting is sometimes necessary, you think that sometimes anyone, including white supremacists, ought to be allowed to riot out of necessity.

    In this way, you support anyone's right to riot, not just white supremacists. If you think that rioting should be limited to just your subjective cause, then you are a hypocrite who doesn't care for egalitarian values or equality, because you believe that one group should be above others.
    ScienceRulesPlaffelvohfen
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    @Happy_Killbot i don't support white supremacy. I just said that sometimes rioting is necessary.
    Actually, you are. Let me make a little logical proposition:

    you claim: "rioting is sometimes necessary"

    Premise 1: sometimes we ought to riot out of necessity,
    Some laws, social institutions, and basic human decency forbid rioting.
    Therefore, anything which forbids rioting ought to be removed so that people can riot out of necessity.

    If there is nothing which forbids rioting, then anyone can riot out of necessity.
    Therefore, if you think that rioting is sometimes necessary, you think that sometimes anyone, including white supremacists, ought to be allowed to riot out of necessity.

    In this way, you support anyone's right to riot, not just white supremacists. If you think that rioting should be limited to just your subjective cause, then you are a hypocrite who doesn't care for egalitarian values or equality, because you believe that one group should be above others.
    You are just taking it to another level. The fact that I said I don't support the white supremacists is because I don't want a single race to be somewhat like a ruling race. And let me ask you something what do you mean by my "subjective cause"? I wasn't talking particularly about this black movement going on. I was talking about rioting in general. And I think every group or clan or whatever you might call them looks upon rioting as their last resort.
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    You are just taking it to another level. The fact that I said I don't support the white supremacists is because I don't want a single race to be somewhat like a ruling race. And let me ask you something what do you mean by my "subjective cause"? I wasn't talking particularly about this black movement going on. I was talking about rioting in general. And I think every group or clan or whatever you might call them looks upon rioting as their last resort.
    Your subjective cause is saying that you don't want a single race to be somewhat like a ruling race. This is subjective because it is your personal opinion of what we ought to do, or what is best for society, rather that being based on objective reality.

    Again, if you think that it is acceptable for every group to resort to rioting, then you must protect a white supremacists right to riot when they don't get their white supremacist policies enacted, even if that means deliberate violence against minorities.
    ScienceRules
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • To me, it seems like a strange thing to ask... It's like asking : Should we allow water to boil... How does that make any sense?

    When enough heat is applied to it, water will boil, that is just a fact... Riots are the same in that they are social eruptions, they occur because social problems are left unaddressed for too long... Sure riots are disruptive and destructive, it's their nature to be so... 

    If we don't want riots, because they are indeed destructive, then we must address social problems/tensions as soon as they arise. Really address and resolve them, just acknowledging them is not enough... 
    piloteer
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen ;
    To me, it seems like a strange thing to ask... It's like asking : Should we allow water to boil... How does that make any sense?

    When enough heat is applied to it, water will boil, that is just a fact... Riots are the same in that they are social eruptions, they occur because social problems are left unaddressed for too long... Sure riots are disruptive and destructive, it's their nature to be so... 

    If we don't want riots, because they are indeed destructive, then we must address social problems/tensions as soon as they arise. Really address and resolve them, just acknowledging them is not enough... 
    The reason this makes no sense is because you are asking and answering totally different questions.

    If we ask "should we allow water to boil" we are not asking "Can water boil" We would be asking "Should we permit people to take actions which cause water to boil". In this case the first question has an objective answer, yes if you apply enough heat or lower the pressure then water will boil. The second question has a subjective answer that might vary from person to person.

    When we ask: "SHOULD RIOTS BE ALLOWED?" we are not asking if riots happen, or under what objective circumstances will riots occur, either due to neglect of officials or public perception.

    Similarly, we are not asking "What actions should be taken to avoid riots" In which case I would agree with your general assessment of the situation. However this is dependent on your subjective opinion that we ought to take action to avoid riots. I can just as easily ask: "What action should be taken to cause riots" which again has an objective answer.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Asher34Asher34 99 Pts
    @Asher34
    Well yes so much violence wasn't really needed.
    0 violence was needed or called for . He was charged with murder very quickly his wife left him he is a social outcast now. No sane person supports him kneeling on that man's neck . But I will be a and say Mr. Floyd was no saint he was a violent criminal who held a gun to a pregnant woman's belly while his homies robed her house . If there was real justice he would have been shot by that woman right there , or at least faced life in prison . He did not deserve to die with a knee on his neck but the rioters you all seem to support think he was a great person or a saint. No killing of any person is a valid reason to burn down stores assault cops and innocent people. This no justice no peace bs is simply a excuse to act in the worst ways towards your own town and police force . 
  • @Plaffelvohfen ;
    To me, it seems like a strange thing to ask... It's like asking : Should we allow water to boil... How does that make any sense?

    When enough heat is applied to it, water will boil, that is just a fact... Riots are the same in that they are social eruptions, they occur because social problems are left unaddressed for too long... Sure riots are disruptive and destructive, it's their nature to be so... 

    If we don't want riots, because they are indeed destructive, then we must address social problems/tensions as soon as they arise. Really address and resolve them, just acknowledging them is not enough... 
    The reason this makes no sense is because you are asking and answering totally different questions.

    If we ask "should we allow water to boil" we are not asking "Can water boil" We would be asking "Should we permit people to take actions which cause water to boil". In this case the first question has an objective answer, yes if you apply enough heat or lower the pressure then water will boil. The second question has a subjective answer that might vary from person to person.

    When we ask: "SHOULD RIOTS BE ALLOWED?" we are not asking if riots happen, or under what objective circumstances will riots occur, either due to neglect of officials or public perception.

    Similarly, we are not asking "What actions should be taken to avoid riots" In which case I would agree with your general assessment of the situation. However this is dependent on your subjective opinion that we ought to take action to avoid riots. I can just as easily ask: "What action should be taken to cause riots" which again has an objective answer.
    If you're not asking any of these these questions, then what is the actual question?  What's the point of asking this?
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • To me, it seems like a strange thing to ask... It's like asking : Should we allow water to boil... How does that make any sense?

    When enough heat is applied to it, water will boil, that is just a fact... Riots are the same in that they are social eruptions, they occur because social problems are left unaddressed for too long... Sure riots are disruptive and destructive, it's their nature to be so... 

    If we don't want riots, because they are indeed destructive, then we must address social problems/tensions as soon as they arise. Really address and resolve them, just acknowledging them is not enough... 
    Yes very much so.
    Plaffelvohfen
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @Asher34
    Well yes he was no saint. 
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @Happy_Killbot
    Well minorities and the depressed resort to riots when they are left with no choice. The class or clan or whatever which has the majority or say the power don't riot. Because they don't need to.
    Happy_Killbot
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @Plaffelvohfen ;
    If you're not asking any of these these questions, then what is the actual question?  What's the point of asking this?
    The actual question if made more specific would be something like:

    "Is it ever acceptable for a society to permit open rioting without consequence?"

    There are 3 main reasons we might ask this question:
    1. Legal policy, or determination for restrictions on individual's actions
    2. Development of standard procedures for law enforcement
    3. Creating a template for the self-maintenance of society
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    @Happy_Killbot
    Well minorities and the depressed resort to riots when they are left with no choice. The class or clan or whatever which has the majority or say the power don't riot. Because they don't need to.
    This is completely irrelevant.

    How exactly is this an argument that some people should be allowed to riot? If rioting is allowed, then the majority is allowed to riot as well, even if they are already in power.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @Happy_Killbot
    They don't usually. And I am not saying that they have to but often this is the only choice left.
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    @Happy_Killbot
    They don't usually. And I am not saying that they have to but often this is the only choice left.

    We are asking if they should be allowed to.

    If you think it is acceptable for rioting on the grounds that they "have to because they don't have a choice left"

    Then you would necessarily need to support white supremacists right to riot when they "have to because they don't have a choice left"

    Otherwise you are upholding a double standard.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @Happy_Killbot
    I am sorry to say but you are being stuck at a particular point.
    Happy_Killbot
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @ScienceRules ;
    @Happy_Killbot
    I am sorry to say but you are being stuck at a particular point.
    That's not an argument.

    Do you really have nothing to say?
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Asher34Asher34 99 Pts
    @Asher34
    Well yes he was no saint. 
    Do you condone the violent actions of these BLM / ANTIFA Terrorists calling for killing of cops calling for defunding and or disbanning of police nationwide . That is basically calling for violent anarchy . Without police / laws what is to stop actual racists from targeting the people they hate? I will say if riots came to my door they would be met with extreme action
    Happy_Killbot
  • @Asher34
    Maybe to some extent yes I condone such violence. Well then they better not come to your doors lol.
    Asher34
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • Asher34Asher34 99 Pts
    @Asher34
    Maybe to some extent yes I condone such violence. Well then they better not come to your doors lol.
    If you in any way support or condone the attacking innocent people and burning of property ie violent riots. Then you are a POS . Violent action by civilians is only justified when your life, property , or the lives of loved ones is in direct danger by a person or persons. Sorry but black people who are not commiting crimes are in no more danger of getting shot by police than any other race. I have a very negative view of BLM as I see them as a race supremacy group . They imply only the lives that matter are the black lives taken by cops and or white people . 
  • @Happy_Killbot

    "Is it ever acceptable for a society to permit open rioting without consequence?"

    Still sounds very strange to me... Sounds like asking "Should we allow murder?"... It's very strange because if allowed, then it's not murder anymore but just killing (semantics maybe, but still true...). 

    In the same way, "legal riots" sounds weird... I think they wouldn't be riots but just "violent destruction of stuff"... And in the same way killing may sometimes be justified, violent destruction of stuff may well be justified sometimes too... And as with killing, the circumstances under which it may be justified are quite rare though... 
    Asher34
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Asher34
    I don't support this burning and and also this BLM thing. Keeping in mind a bit of history I said "maybe to some extent".
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @Asher34
    I don't support this burning and and also this BLM thing. Keeping in mind a bit of history I said "maybe to some extent".
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • @Asher34
    I don't support this burning and and also this BLM thing. Keeping in mind a bit of history I said "maybe to some extent".
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • Sorry for so many posts. Don't know how it happened.
    Lover, hunter, friend and enemy
    You will always be every one of these
    Nothing's fair in love and war.
  • Asher34Asher34 99 Pts
    @Plaffelvohfen So you think that the riots are justified because of the death of Floyd. Riots are not a acceptable recourse . I know people on the identitarian left think that any and all action that attacks police, white people as well as Donald Trump is justified . But they are not . Just as I would not support white supremacy or Female Supremacy aka feminism . I do not support the Racist BLM terrorists nor Antifa  
  • @Asher34

    You know what happens when you ASSume things right? 

    Where did I write that these riots were justified?
    piloteerScienceRules
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch