Should violent protesters be allowed to join the Black Lives Matter movement?

theinfectedmaster

Argument Topic: Of course not.

I don't think violent protesters should be allowed to join any protest movement. They're a threat to society.

just_sayin

theinfectedmaster said:

I don't think violent protesters should be allowed to join any protest movement. They're a threat to society.

Violent protesters are already part of the Black Lives Moment.  During the summer of 2020 in the US there were 500+ riots in the USA were BLM was associated.  See US Crisis Monitor.  These riots resulted in the deaths of at least 25 people, destroyed hundreds of buildings and resulted in at least 2 billion dollars in property damage.

jack

theinfectedmaster said:
Should violent protesters be allowed to join the Black Lives Matter movement?

1st Amendment says, Congress shall make no law respecting the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

Hello the:

One mans freedom to redress his grievances, is another mans riot..  What do you call armed raiders descending upon a private ship and dumping the cargo into the sea??  Du*de!.   One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

excon

ZeusAres42

movements like this and certain things that are said cause public perception issues, that in turn create violence and then retaliatory violence and the cycle contines. Hence, why in some liberal countries who do this correctly try to focus on equality and diversity, as opposed to some sort of apartheid sh!t. 

theinfectedmaster

 @just_sayin The violent protesters should be banned from joining those movements, too.

just_sayin

theinfectedmaster said:

 @just_sayin The violent protesters should be banned from joining those movements, too.

My belief is that if you loot, murder, or destroy property you should be held accountable for your crimes.  However, most charges against BLM rioters were dropped.  Kama Harris and Joe Biden's campaigns both gave donations to a group that paid the bail of rioters, some of which had raped children.  It seems like the riots of BLM and Antifa are treated very differently than other groups.  

jack

theinfectedmaster said:

I don't think violent protesters should be allowed to join any protest movement.

Hello the:

Do you think there's some sort of application to join BLM, or do they just show up?  I don't think Jan 6 violent protesters should be allowed out of their house.  But, nobody cares what I think...  

Do people in the world care about my wants??  Uhh, no..  They don't.  Is there a  way to STOP people from joining groups that you don't like?  Uhh, no..  There isn't..  Do you belong to any group that I might consider violent??  I'll bet you do.  Should I be able to stop you..  Uhh, no.

excon

MayCaesar

Employing violence implies departing from what we call a civilized discussion and entering the realm of "fist persuasion". I would suggest the point of view according to which "fist persuasion" is incompatible with advocacy for any particular idea: it, instead, coerces others to embrace the persuader's authority and not any particular message the persuader is trying to send.
That is to say, a violent protester is a part of a meta-ideological violent movement, and not of the Black Lives Matter or any other ideological movement.

As an analogy, suppose a husband wants his wife to wash dishes. He makes a compelling argument for why she should be the one washing dishes, but his argument fails to persuade her. Then he, frustrated, punches her in the face and yells, "Wash the dishes, or I will kill you!" Naturally, she will do the dishes - but is it fair to say that he has persuaded her that she should wash the dishes? Not really. The only thing he persuaded her of is that she should do whatever he tells her to do - or pay a terrible price of not doing so. She has not become convinced of his ideology, only of his insanity.

Bogan

The heading for this topic makes about as much sense as saying "should thugs be allowed to join Mussolini's Black Shirts?"      "Should thugs be allowed to join Hitler's SS?"    "Should thugs be allowed to join ANTIFA?"

jack

Bogan said:

The heading for this topic makes about as much sense as saying "should thugs be allowed to join Mussolini's Black Shirts?"

Hello B:

Actually, it's a great topic..  But, not because of the question asked..  But, because it points directly to a post I made last week.... If you recall, I brought up the importance of learning civics..  Nobody cared..

But, the above question exposes the unalterable truth that we, as a nation, have NO IDEA how the country works.. And, that's very dangerous.  Lemme repeat..  If you don't know the rules, you'll NEVER win.  The Constitution is the rules, and civics is how it works. 

Thinking there's some sort of agency that approves which political organization a citizen can join, is NOT America as I know it...  Lemme repeat, if one does NOT know that the citizens are in charge, the oppressors have won.

excon

all4actt

@jack. The BLM riots were not freedom fighters.

jack

all4actt said:

@jack. The BLM riots were not freedom fighters.

Hello a:

Yeah, they were..  You just didn't like the particular freedoms they were seeking. 

excon

Bogan

we, as a nation, have NO IDEA how the country works.. 

Speak for yourself.     You may be ignorant, but smarter people know better.      

just_sayin

Argument Topic: The Media Treats BLM Riots Differently

At the May 30 and 31st BLM riot at the White House:

1) 67 Secret Service agents were injured and sustained multiple injuries from projectiles such as bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items. 
2) 65 U.S. Park Police officers were injured (these are different than Secret Service agents) most were injured at Lafayette Park (North side of White House).
3) At least 150 officers, from various jurisdictions, were injured over the multiday riot.
4) A church was burned
5) The threat was serious enough that the president had to be moved to an underground bunker
6) At least 6 Secret Service vehicles were damaged
7) According to the AP, more than 70 stores were looted, and the riot caused $1.8 million in damage

The media mostly laughed at the fact Trump had to be evacuated for his own safety.  Instead of focusing on the looting, burning of buildings, property damage, and attack on the White House, and the physical assaults to over 150 officers, the media falsely said that tear gas was used to remove the rioters.  While pellets were used, they were not tear gas as was falsely reported, nor did the call to use them come from Trump, but the DC controlled park police.  

This goes to show the difference of treatment.  The media treated those who burned down a church, looted, and threw bricks at officers as valiant protesters, rather than rioters who committed felony crimes.