America

[cashead]

We all have a line in the sand, but where different people draw that line is an interesting question.

This guy in Bristol was shitting on slaves in the late 1600s so there's a very public line that anyone who was evil at that time should not be celebrated. So 300 - 350 years back from now is our starting point.

Are we going any further back? There were plenty of horrible people around, or at least people who did some horrible things, in the centuries immediately before that, so are we going back further still, or declaring an amnesty at some random point around 350 - 400 years back?

There's a difference between acknowledging and outright obfuscation. Colston's legacy of slavery and sham philanthropy has been heavily obfuscated, and a decade of community-based requests for acknowledgement/removal being obstructed by Tories and Merchant Venturers is how we ended up where we are.

And for the record, people who did the shit that Colston did should now be reviled for what they are. Fuck that amnesty shit.

Also, it would be interesting to find out what the criteria are for being judged as EVIL? Colson? Coldston? Coulson? Bristol guy did some good stuff but NOT ENOUGH and has been cast down. What about guys like Andrew Carnegie? Henry Ford? Do acts of philanthropy, kindness and generosity ever count as balance, or is 1 evil act always and forever more important?

If you could provide an example of someone who only did 1 evil act, who then presumably balanced it out with philanthropy, kindness and generosity, that would be great.

Colston was a slaver. Yeah, we've established that fact. He was also a Tory, but that's neither here nor there. His "philanthropy" was a fucking sham anyway, since he went out of his way to ensure no one who didn't agree or supported his past actions benefited from it - i.e., anyone who had an issue with his history of slavery and profiting off of human misery and suffering.

Andrew Carnegie was a robber baron, making money off of ethically dubious means in order to accumulate wealth, at the expense of his workers.

Henry Ford was a fucking nazi who endorsed the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and published a newspaper endorsing nazi shit and exploited his workers so much that his kids had to make it a life's work to walk back his lifetime of cuntery.

For Cashead and others who struggle with comprehension, I am not defending Bristol guy or deflecting away from him. I couldn't give less of a shit about his statue. I am interested in where this path takes us tho.

The lady doth protest too much.

[Mikey Brown]

Anyone seen anything clear around Erik Salgado’s death yet? I’ve heard conflicting reports whether his unborn child died too or not.

Sarah Grossman has died, seemingly from being pepper sprayed and tear gassed.

We seem to be at a point now it’s just a matter of seeing if the police can go a whole 24 hours without breaking the Geneva convention.

[cashead]

Never knowingly under virtue signalled

Almost missed this. Nice use of alt-right language.

[cashead]

Anyone seen anything clear around Erik Salgado’s death yet? I’ve heard conflicting reports whether his unborn child died too or not.

Sarah Grossman has died, seemingly from being pepper sprayed and tear gassed.

We seem to be at a point now it’s just a matter of seeing if the police can go a whole 24 hours without breaking the Geneva convention.

ACAB

[Digby]

Never knowingly under virtue signalled

Almost missed this. Nice use of alt-right language.

I was going for department store blandness, ah well, a swing and a miss

[Digby]

I do quite the proposed route forward with the Colston statue from Banksy

“Here’s an idea that caters for both those who miss the Colston statue and those who don’t. We drag him out the water, put him back on the plinth, tie cable round his neck and commission some life-size bronze statues of protesters in the act of pulling him down. Everyone happy. A famous day commemorated.”

It'd be a touch boring if this was repeated too often, but in one or two cases it's interesting, and far more dynamic than the addition of a board detailing the mixed history of the figure on the plinth

[Sandydragon]

Anyone seen anything clear around Erik Salgado’s death yet? I’ve heard conflicting reports whether his unborn child died too or not.

Sarah Grossman has died, seemingly from being pepper sprayed and tear gassed.

We seem to be at a point now it’s just a matter of seeing if the police can go a whole 24 hours without breaking the Geneva convention.

The cause of Grossman's death is being investigated. AS someone who has been subjected to tear gas, its not a lot of fun and effects tend to be fairly instant but not long lasting. Unless someone is choked to death in a confined space, deaths are rare which is why so many police departments globally use it for crown control. If the use of tear gas on an asthmatic was the cause of death then it will have been a tragic accident.

Initial reports suggest that Salgado was using his car as a weapon when requested to stop by the police.

It's really easy at the moment to use terms such as ACAB and assume that every instance is racism. The Police can't stop doing their job, killing someone with a car is just as lethal as shooting them. Assuming that the police act in a racist and unlawful manner at every opportunity is just as damaging as assuming that all black people are criminals.

[Mikey Brown]

Anyone seen anything clear around Erik Salgado’s death yet? I’ve heard conflicting reports whether his unborn child died too or not.

Sarah Grossman has died, seemingly from being pepper sprayed and tear gassed.

We seem to be at a point now it’s just a matter of seeing if the police can go a whole 24 hours without breaking the Geneva convention.

The cause of Grossman's death is being investigated. AS someone who has been subjected to tear gas, its not a lot of fun and effects tend to be fairly instant but not long lasting. Unless someone is choked to death in a confined space, deaths are rare which is why so many police departments globally use it for crown control. If the use of tear gas on an asthmatic was the cause of death then it will have been a tragic accident.

Initial reports suggest that Salgado was using his car as a weapon when requested to stop by the police.

It's really easy at the moment to use terms such as ACAB and assume that every instance is racism. The Police can't stop doing their job, killing someone with a car is just as lethal as shooting them. Assuming that the police act in a racist and unlawful manner at every opportunity is just as damaging as assuming that all black people are criminals.

Well I think that’s (mostly) fair, though I didn’t say anything about ACAB or what was actually behind these incidents, because there seem to be a lot of conflicting reports.
Throwing that comment about the Geneva convention in there probably was confusing though. I was just watching yet another video of police attacking someone who is clearly a medic trying to give aid to an injured protestor.

[Digby]

The police still rank as one of the most trusted institutions in the US, though how much of that is the understanding a domestic police force is needed and the hope they live up to their supposed standards Vs the reality is hard to gauge.

What would help right now is if the plans to reimagine the way police forces work were not being called defunding programmes because that's far too easy to mischaracterise, and I'd quite like them to set out plans ahead of making changes

[Sandydragon]

Anyone seen anything clear around Erik Salgado’s death yet? I’ve heard conflicting reports whether his unborn child died too or not.

Sarah Grossman has died, seemingly from being pepper sprayed and tear gassed.

We seem to be at a point now it’s just a matter of seeing if the police can go a whole 24 hours without breaking the Geneva convention.

The cause of Grossman's death is being investigated. AS someone who has been subjected to tear gas, its not a lot of fun and effects tend to be fairly instant but not long lasting. Unless someone is choked to death in a confined space, deaths are rare which is why so many police departments globally use it for crown control. If the use of tear gas on an asthmatic was the cause of death then it will have been a tragic accident.

Initial reports suggest that Salgado was using his car as a weapon when requested to stop by the police.

It's really easy at the moment to use terms such as ACAB and assume that every instance is racism. The Police can't stop doing their job, killing someone with a car is just as lethal as shooting them. Assuming that the police act in a racist and unlawful manner at every opportunity is just as damaging as assuming that all black people are criminals.

Well I think that’s (mostly) fair, though I didn’t say anything about ACAB or what was actually behind these incidents, because there seem to be a lot of conflicting reports.
Throwing that comment about the Geneva convention in there probably was confusing though. I was just watching yet another video of police attacking someone who is clearly a medic trying to give aid to an injured protestor.

There are definitely plenty of instances of police overreactingwhci should be addressed. In my view, its important to keep a sense of perspective otherwise the message gets diluted.

[Sandydragon]

The police still rank as one of the most trusted institutions in the US, though how much of that is the understanding a domestic police force is needed and the hope they live up to their supposed standards Vs the reality is hard to gauge.

What would help right now is if the plans to reimagine the way police forces work were not being called defunding programmes because that's far too easy to mischaracterise, and I'd quite like them to set out plans ahead of making changes

There is definitely a need to review use of force guidelines and do more community work not just seek to keep a lid on crime.

But, that will involve a greater effort than just the police. Its really hard to do softly softly when theres full on gang warfare in a particular area.

[Stom]

It might be worth remembering that within living memory the overwhelming majority of UK citizens would have been considered working class and poor, certainly by today's standards. That the UK today has such a large middle class is a testament to the changes that have occurred over the last 80 - 100 years.

Again, for those of a binary thought process, this isn't me saying that we've moved far enough or quickly enough; we could've done more and should be doing more, but the lived experience of millions of UK citizens is that movement is eminently achievable.

Of course, that's been done on the back of the utter destruction of the local and global environment, so I can accept that many of those avenues are now closed and massive change is needed, but that's not a problem exclusive to the UK.

I deeply deeply hate talking about class. It is, with a bitter irony, so completely class-less. Not least because so many staunchly "middle class" people like to pretend they are, or at least are the voice of the, "working class". Really grinds my gears.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Does it really have a large middle class, though, or have we just created a new upper lower class?

Traditionally, the middle classes would have been business owners and so on, people who ran shops, traders, provided services. There aren't many of the so-called middle classes who do that. In fact, apart from the manual labour part, they behave a lot more like the working class have.

So...I'd suggest the vast majority of who you'd consider middle class are actually working class, and those you'd consider working class are just manual workers.

In reality, the number of business owners has gone up, but not by huge, huge numbers.

[Stom]

The cause of Grossman's death is being investigated. AS someone who has been subjected to tear gas, its not a lot of fun and effects tend to be fairly instant but not long lasting. Unless someone is choked to death in a confined space, deaths are rare which is why so many police departments globally use it for crown control. If the use of tear gas on an asthmatic was the cause of death then it will have been a tragic accident.

Initial reports suggest that Salgado was using his car as a weapon when requested to stop by the police.

It's really easy at the moment to use terms such as ACAB and assume that every instance is racism. The Police can't stop doing their job, killing someone with a car is just as lethal as shooting them. Assuming that the police act in a racist and unlawful manner at every opportunity is just as damaging as assuming that all black people are criminals.

Well I think that’s (mostly) fair, though I didn’t say anything about ACAB or what was actually behind these incidents, because there seem to be a lot of conflicting reports.
Throwing that comment about the Geneva convention in there probably was confusing though. I was just watching yet another video of police attacking someone who is clearly a medic trying to give aid to an injured protestor.

There are definitely plenty of instances of police overreactingwhci should be addressed. In my view, its important to keep a sense of perspective otherwise the message gets diluted.

What does it mean to get a sense of perspective, though?

Does it mean saying the police "overreacted" instead of saying the police brutally attacked someone they had taken an oath to protect, who was standing there, protesting peacefully with their hands in the air?

[Sandydragon]

Well I think that’s (mostly) fair, though I didn’t say anything about ACAB or what was actually behind these incidents, because there seem to be a lot of conflicting reports.
Throwing that comment about the Geneva convention in there probably was confusing though. I was just watching yet another video of police attacking someone who is clearly a medic trying to give aid to an injured protestor.

There are definitely plenty of instances of police overreactingwhci should be addressed. In my view, its important to keep a sense of perspective otherwise the message gets diluted.

What does it mean to get a sense of perspective, though?

Does it mean saying the police "overreacted" instead of saying the police brutally attacked someone they had taken an oath to protect, who was standing there, protesting peacefully with their hands in the air?

It means that there are still plenty of daily incidents where the police are acting quite reasonably. Of course there are incidents where it looks clearly unreasonable and they should be called out on that, but that doesn't mean that every incident is going to be racist or involve excessive use of force so don't assume that it does and people should stop trying to highlight every singe incident as such. It dilutes the perfectly valid arguments that can be made.

[Sandydragon]

It might be worth remembering that within living memory the overwhelming majority of UK citizens would have been considered working class and poor, certainly by today's standards. That the UK today has such a large middle class is a testament to the changes that have occurred over the last 80 - 100 years.

Again, for those of a binary thought process, this isn't me saying that we've moved far enough or quickly enough; we could've done more and should be doing more, but the lived experience of millions of UK citizens is that movement is eminently achievable.

Of course, that's been done on the back of the utter destruction of the local and global environment, so I can accept that many of those avenues are now closed and massive change is needed, but that's not a problem exclusive to the UK.

I deeply deeply hate talking about class. It is, with a bitter irony, so completely class-less. Not least because so many staunchly "middle class" people like to pretend they are, or at least are the voice of the, "working class". Really grinds my gears.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Does it really have a large middle class, though, or have we just created a new upper lower class?

Traditionally, the middle classes would have been business owners and so on, people who ran shops, traders, provided services. There aren't many of the so-called middle classes who do that. In fact, apart from the manual labour part, they behave a lot more like the working class have.

So...I'd suggest the vast majority of who you'd consider middle class are actually working class, and those you'd consider working class are just manual workers.

In reality, the number of business owners has gone up, but not by huge, huge numbers.

the social group between the upper and working classes, including professional and business people and their families

Lots of people can rightly be labelled as professionals.

[Donny osmond]

It might be worth remembering that within living memory the overwhelming majority of UK citizens would have been considered working class and poor, certainly by today's standards. That the UK today has such a large middle class is a testament to the changes that have occurred over the last 80 - 100 years.

Again, for those of a binary thought process, this isn't me saying that we've moved far enough or quickly enough; we could've done more and should be doing more, but the lived experience of millions of UK citizens is that movement is eminently achievable.

Of course, that's been done on the back of the utter destruction of the local and global environment, so I can accept that many of those avenues are now closed and massive change is needed, but that's not a problem exclusive to the UK.

I deeply deeply hate talking about class. It is, with a bitter irony, so completely class-less. Not least because so many staunchly "middle class" people like to pretend they are, or at least are the voice of the, "working class". Really grinds my gears.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Does it really have a large middle class, though, or have we just created a new upper lower class?

Traditionally, the middle classes would have been business owners and so on, people who ran shops, traders, provided services. There aren't many of the so-called middle classes who do that. In fact, apart from the manual labour part, they behave a lot more like the working class have.

So...I'd suggest the vast majority of who you'd consider middle class are actually working class, and those you'd consider working class are just manual workers.

In reality, the number of business owners has gone up, but not by huge, huge numbers.

Personally I'd say the UK has a massive middle class, but that's my subjective analysis

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Sandydragon]

Apparently there are now 7 social classes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22007058

[Mikey Brown]

There are definitely plenty of instances of police overreactingwhci should be addressed. In my view, its important to keep a sense of perspective otherwise the message gets diluted.

What does it mean to get a sense of perspective, though?

Does it mean saying the police "overreacted" instead of saying the police brutally attacked someone they had taken an oath to protect, who was standing there, protesting peacefully with their hands in the air?

It means that there are still plenty of daily incidents where the police are acting quite reasonably. Of course there are incidents where it looks clearly unreasonable and they should be called out on that, but that doesn't mean that every incident is going to be racist or involve excessive use of force so don't assume that it does and people should stop trying to highlight every singe incident as such. It dilutes the perfectly valid arguments that can be made.

I just don’t get this.

Sure you can find people who are saying every single cop is a racist and every single cop loves assaulting people but that doesn’t mean people highlighting the hundreds of terrible incidents caught on film (even just in the last couple of weeks) is the same thing.

Calling attention to it is not dismissing all the positive interactions, it’s just pointing out the sheer volume of incidents where Police fail to calm or de-escalate potentially violent situations. Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

Everyone is probably guilty at times of responding to only the dumbest, most sweeping generalisations made by those on the other side of the argument. The fact some people are going OTT about how bad all cops are does not diminish the horror of what the real perpetrators are doing. And there seem to be an awful lot of them.

[Which Tyler]

I feel that it might be time for this video again:

[Mikey Brown]

That BBC article is fucking stupid. There’s good arguments the middle class is basically disappearing in many places, particularly cities.

I guess it’s just better optics not to acknowledge the volume of people who could only reasonably qualify as ‘poverty class’. Just pretend they don’t exist.

[Puja]

Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

This. Right here. Spot on.

Puja

[Stom]

What does it mean to get a sense of perspective, though?

Does it mean saying the police "overreacted" instead of saying the police brutally attacked someone they had taken an oath to protect, who was standing there, protesting peacefully with their hands in the air?

It means that there are still plenty of daily incidents where the police are acting quite reasonably. Of course there are incidents where it looks clearly unreasonable and they should be called out on that, but that doesn't mean that every incident is going to be racist or involve excessive use of force so don't assume that it does and people should stop trying to highlight every singe incident as such. It dilutes the perfectly valid arguments that can be made.

I just don’t get this.

Sure you can find people who are saying every single cop is a racist and every single cop loves assaulting people but that doesn’t mean people highlighting the hundreds of terrible incidents caught on film (even just in the last couple of weeks) is the same thing.

Calling attention to it is not dismissing all the positive interactions, it’s just pointing out the sheer volume of incidents where Police fail to calm or de-escalate potentially violent situations. Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

Everyone is probably guilty at times of responding to only the dumbest, most sweeping generalisations made by those on the other side of the argument. The fact some people are going OTT about how bad all cops are does not diminish the horror of what the real perpetrators are doing. And there seem to be an awful lot of them.

What he said.

By saying the police overreacted instead of saying that the police perpetrated a crime against an innocent, on several occasions, is a gross misrepresentation of fact. I'd argue that is far more harmful than the handful of people who are going OTT by labelling all police as racist thugs.

But, again, as Trevor Noah pointed out, by association they look very bad because they're not standing up against their colleagues who are racist thugs.

In fact, he likens the police (in the US) to a gang in the way they step up to protect their own rather than stepping up to condemn violence against the very people they are sworn to protect.

The sense of perspective is saying that the police in the US is an extraordinarily corrupt organisation unfit for its purpose and should be remodelled from the bottom up into something that actually serves and protects people.

[Sandydragon]

What does it mean to get a sense of perspective, though?

Does it mean saying the police "overreacted" instead of saying the police brutally attacked someone they had taken an oath to protect, who was standing there, protesting peacefully with their hands in the air?

It means that there are still plenty of daily incidents where the police are acting quite reasonably. Of course there are incidents where it looks clearly unreasonable and they should be called out on that, but that doesn't mean that every incident is going to be racist or involve excessive use of force so don't assume that it does and people should stop trying to highlight every singe incident as such. It dilutes the perfectly valid arguments that can be made.

I just don’t get this.

Sure you can find people who are saying every single cop is a racist and every single cop loves assaulting people but that doesn’t mean people highlighting the hundreds of terrible incidents caught on film (even just in the last couple of weeks) is the same thing.

Calling attention to it is not dismissing all the positive interactions, it’s just pointing out the sheer volume of incidents where Police fail to calm or de-escalate potentially violent situations. Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

Everyone is probably guilty at times of responding to only the dumbest, most sweeping generalisations made by those on the other side of the argument. The fact some people are going OTT about how bad all cops are does not diminish the horror of what the real perpetrators are doing. And there seem to be an awful lot of them.

I'll repeat myself then.

Whilst there are plenty of actual incidents where police have used excessive force in the past couple of weeks, assuming that every incident is the fault of the police, or that harassment/racism is present is plain wrong. Each incident should be viewed on its own merits, not with pre-conceptions. Those that are, or appear to be, clear excessive then of course they should be called out. But there are equally occasions where Police in the US, and elsewhere, will use force quite reasonably, including lethal force, where it is perfectly legitimate. Labelling all incidents as shocking dilutes the valid message that needs to be aired.

Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

FFS that's not the argument I am making.

The police are permitted to use force when it is reasonable. Where an incident meets the criteria, there is no point in anyone jumping up and down and shouting about excessive force or racism when clearly the police officers in question were acting with the laws given the situation.

If you feel that the use of reasonable force by a police officer in the course f their duties is a crime then that is fucking stupid. There are occasions when it is necessary.

Call out the police when they breach those laws, not when they operate fairly. At the moment, every incident is hitting social media and they are all being highlighted as police brutality and or racism. That is simply not the case. Hence the call for some perspective.

[Sandydragon]

It means that there are still plenty of daily incidents where the police are acting quite reasonably. Of course there are incidents where it looks clearly unreasonable and they should be called out on that, but that doesn't mean that every incident is going to be racist or involve excessive use of force so don't assume that it does and people should stop trying to highlight every singe incident as such. It dilutes the perfectly valid arguments that can be made.

I just don’t get this.

Sure you can find people who are saying every single cop is a racist and every single cop loves assaulting people but that doesn’t mean people highlighting the hundreds of terrible incidents caught on film (even just in the last couple of weeks) is the same thing.

Calling attention to it is not dismissing all the positive interactions, it’s just pointing out the sheer volume of incidents where Police fail to calm or de-escalate potentially violent situations. Framing it as though Police managing to restrain themselves from committing crimes (against their own citizens) counts as a positive, rather than the norm, is setting such an absurdly low bar.

Everyone is probably guilty at times of responding to only the dumbest, most sweeping generalisations made by those on the other side of the argument. The fact some people are going OTT about how bad all cops are does not diminish the horror of what the real perpetrators are doing. And there seem to be an awful lot of them.

What he said.

By saying the police overreacted instead of saying that the police perpetrated a crime against an innocent, on several occasions, is a gross misrepresentation of fact. I'd argue that is far more harmful than the handful of people who are going OTT by labelling all police as racist thugs.

But, again, as Trevor Noah pointed out, by association they look very bad because they're not standing up against their colleagues who are racist thugs.

In fact, he likens the police (in the US) to a gang in the way they step up to protect their own rather than stepping up to condemn violence against the very people they are sworn to protect.

The sense of perspective is saying that the police in the US is an extraordinarily corrupt organisation unfit for its purpose and should be remodelled from the bottom up into something that actually serves and protects people.

Do you actually read any of these posts? Where police have used excessive force should be called out. I've consistently argued for that. The term 'excessive use of force' is the correct one by the way - feel free to look it up.

Highlighting incidents where the facts have not been established and where police officers may have used force reasonably is just adding more fuel to the flames and is nonsense. Thats the point I'm making. Use some perspective to accurately highlight those incidents where there is excessive force. Its that simple.

[Sandydragon]

That BBC article is fucking stupid. There’s good arguments the middle class is basically disappearing in many places, particularly cities.

I guess it’s just better optics not to acknowledge the volume of people who could only reasonably qualify as ‘poverty class’. Just pretend they don’t exist.

Relative or absolute.