Official LRC President Joseph R Biden Thread

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

El Runkin wrote:

Yes, that would be consistent with the definition of looting. You've stated a truism.

Very disingenuous statement. There were many BLM riots in the summer of 2020, causing many billions of dollars ($,$,$,$) in damages, destroyed businesses, destroyed government buildings, injuries and deaths. Your attempt to minimize that is dishonest.

First clause of sentence is, again, disingenuous. There were MANY riots and looting sprees, irrespective of how many people you think were just "hanging out downtown." See above.

The rest of sentence is a strange decision by you to take an irrelevant and probably unsupportable shot at the alleged "deep fears" or "rural folks." Even if true, I can't see how that supports anything you are trying to say, including minimizing the extent of the BLM riots.

You don't see how the inherent fear rural folks have of cities might color their perception of major protests and riots that happen in those cities? You really don't? You really really don't?

El Runkin wrote:

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

You don't see how the inherent fear rural folks have of cities might color their perception of major protests and riots that happen in those cities? You really don't? You really really don't?

I don't see how your continued reference to the alleged "inherent fears" that you say "rural folk" have of cities or downtowns matters at all in the context of this discussion -- i.e., I don't get what you think you are getting at. State the punchline already.

Independent research showed that the protests were over 90% peaceful. It's actually disingenuous to broadly categorize the summer of 2020 BLM protests as riots when they were not, broadly speaking, riots.

It is irrelevant what percentage of the BLM protests were deemed peaceful, by whatever methodology your unnamed and unlinked independent research used. There were many BLM riots and looting sprees causing billions of dollars in needless damages and grief in the summer of 2020, and the fact that you claim 90% of protests didn't devolve into a riot is an irrelevant statistic. It would be like an attorney for a criminal defendant serial rapist to say at sentencing "Your honor, please keep in mind that my client didn't rape 90% of the women he met last year."

Furthermore, is 90% or 95% or whatever good? You seem proud of the number. It's good on a math test. Not so good as a measure of, e.g., safe plane landings. What's our standard for determining whether some organization is rioting and looting too much? You don't know? You really, really don't know?

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

El Runkin wrote:

I don't see how your continued reference to the alleged "inherent fears" that you say "rural folk" have of cities or downtowns matters at all in the context of this discussion -- i.e., I don't get what you think you are getting at. State the punchline already.

It is irrelevant what percentage of the BLM protests were deemed peaceful, by whatever methodology your unnamed and unlinked independent research used. There were many BLM riots and looting sprees causing billions of dollars in needless damages and grief in the summer of 2020, and the fact that you claim 90% of protests didn't devolve into a riot is an irrelevant statistic. It would be like an attorney for a criminal defendant serial rapist to say at sentencing "Your honor, please keep in mind that my client didn't rape 90% of the women he met last year."

Furthermore, is 90% or 95% or whatever good? You seem proud of the number. It's good on a math test. Not so good as a measure of, e.g., safe plane landings. What's our standard for determining whether some organization is rioting and looting too much? You don't know? You really, really don't know?

You think the protestors last year were all part of or acting in accordance with the BLM "organization?" That's pretty funny. The BLM protests were a social movement against, primarily, Trumpism.

El Runkin wrote:

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

You think the protestors last year were all part of or acting in accordance with the BLM "organization?" That's pretty funny. The BLM protests were a social movement against, primarily, Trumpism.

I don't think you are correct about the purpose of BLM, but I'll do my best to call the widespread rioting and looting "the BLM social movement riots."

Rural folk are naturally going to assume that anything happening downtown is worse than it actually is. They regularly call Chicago a warzone. I lived in Chicago for two years from 2019-2021, through the protests, sorry, riots. I literally walked to Wingstop in Wicker Park the day of the "riots." Maybe I should get a purple heart for that, or at least the medal of honor for my brave adventure through the hellscape that was BLM 2020. In actuality, it was much more tame than these people think. Boring even.

Once again, I do not get what your fixation on "rural folks" has to do with anything.

The BLM social movement riots of 2020 were certainly not boring. The exaggerated, insensitive rhetoric associated with your anecdotal story about your experience with the riots is boring. So you are more calloused to riots and looting than some guy from the sticks? Explain to me how that matters at all.

Property was damaged. I feel really bad for the property. May the property rest in peace. A moment of silence for insurance companies.

Very strange thing to be snotty and sarcastic about. Innocent third parties had their businesses and homes and streets destroyed for no reason at all. Places they worked at, devoted large portions of their lives and livelihoods to. Your tone seem to indicate you have zero compassion for people who had to watch that day to day and deal with the aftermath. Maybe you've never had to sweat out the effort it takes people to build some small business on the margins. And insurance doesn't cover everyone or every damage, by the way. Certainly doesn't help some employee who has no where to go to work once the place is looted and torched. As if all this hate, criminality, destruction and emotional grief can be reduced to sending out checks a few months down the road. I thought you were just biased at first, but you just seem like a really lousy person.

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

El Runkin wrote:

I don't think you are correct about the purpose of BLM, but I'll do my best to call the widespread rioting and looting "the BLM social movement riots."

Once again, I do not get what your fixation on "rural folks" has to do with anything.

The BLM social movement riots of 2020 were certainly not boring. The exaggerated, insensitive rhetoric associated with your anecdotal story about your experience with the riots is boring. So you are more calloused to riots and looting than some guy from the sticks? Explain to me how that matters at all.

Very strange thing to be snotty and sarcastic about. Innocent third parties had their businesses and homes and streets destroyed for no reason at all. Places they worked at, devoted large portions of their lives and livelihoods to. Your tone seem to indicate you have zero compassion for people who had to watch that day to day and deal with the aftermath. Maybe you've never had to sweat out the effort it takes people to build some small business on the margins. And insurance doesn't cover everyone or every damage, by the way. Certainly doesn't help some employee who has no where to go to work once the place is looted and torched. As if all this hate, criminality, destruction and emotional grief can be reduced to sending out checks a few months down the road. I thought you were just biased at first, but you just seem like a really lousy person.

People used to think like this about the Civil Rights marches and anti-Vietnam protests too. People in the center always think the social movement is too brash, too destructive. It's a feature (or bug, who knows) of the human psyche that slows change and prevents progress. Some guy in the 1950s who thought like you was probably like, think of these poor southern towns being uprooted and torn apart by the dangerous civil rights movement. Think about the business owners of Selma or like, wherever stuff happened!

El Runkin wrote:

hunter wheres the blow wrote:

People used to think like this about the Civil Rights marches and anti-Vietnam protests too. People in the center always think the social movement is too brash, too destructive. It's a feature (or bug, who knows) of the human psyche that slows change and prevents progress. Some guy in the 1950s who thought like you was probably like, think of these poor southern towns being uprooted and torn apart by the dangerous civil rights movement. Think about the business owners of Selma or like, wherever stuff happened!

You're all over the place, Hunter Blow. You have now shown (1) a deep insensitivity to the victims of widespread BLM rioting and looting, (2) an idiotic desire to excuse that needless criminality and destruction as insignificant, "boring," and/or morally justifiable, (3) a misunderstanding of statistics, (4) a misunderstanding of the express purpose of the very BLM social movement you are defending, and (5) a still unexplained interest in the alleged "inherent fears" of "rural folks."

You've now moved on to one of the cheaper low-level posting tactics we see here -- the false equivalence mushed with strawman accusation. You have no idea what I think of the 1960s Civil Rights marches or anti-Vietnam protests. No idea at all. And I'd bet that the majority of people involved in those social movements, or who still support them today, would strongly disagree with your attempt to find moral equivalence between any aspects of the 2020 BLM social movement riots/protests, and the 1960s Civil Rights marches and/or anti-Vietnam protests.

You are a lousy person, and a lousy poster who can't focus your thoughts or directions -- i.e., you are not that bright.