Nonviolent Protest and Resistance Privileged

[abaris]

The two of you seem to share a common information source.  

I go by what I see in Europe. And the protests these guys actually ruined. Protests for valid causes that have been dragged into the dirt by these guys showing up and starting to destroy stuff, so that the powers that be could shrug it off as riots. Such as demonstrating against a neonazi ball. Splendid opportunity for the rightwing tabloids to place their narrative of the peaceful right and the violent left. I'm not a friend of these guys, since other than the claim of anarchism, they don't have any agenda to speak off.

They're violence tourists showing up uninvited and unwanted.

[The Grand Nudger]

The "powers that be" shrug things off as riots as a matter of principle and standard operating procedure.  You know this. You call them violence tourists, I call them successful provocatuers....and that's -without- bickering on any factual point between us, lol.

/ shrugs

[Thumpalumpacus]

Saying someone's actions are justified in their own mind means nothing because every action that isn't involuntary must be justified in their own mind.
It renders the word useless. It's a peice of useless information.

Nonsense. People do things they know aren't justified all the time. Are you on something that's affecting your thinking?

Khem's point, which you clearly still don't get even after patient explication, is that when someone puts their own ass on the line, you have a pretty good metric on the level of justification that person feels.

At this point, you strike me as being more desirous of argument than understanding. I've seen this mood in you before and doubt the sincerity of your posting when I do see it.

[abaris]

The "powers that be" shrug things off as riots as a matter of principle.  You know this.

But don't try to educate me on protests I took part in where these guys showed up to ruin what we had to say. They're not welcome with anybody having a real message besides anarchy and destruction.

[paulpablo]

Saying someone's actions are justified in their own mind means nothing because every action that isn't involuntary must be justified in their own mind.
It renders the word useless. It's a peice of useless information.

Nonsense. People do things they know aren't justified all the time. Are you on something that's affecting your thinking?

Khem's point, which you clearly still don't get even after patient explication, is that when someone puts their own ass on the line, you have a pretty good metric on the level of justification that person feels.

At this point, you strike me as being more desirous of argument than understanding. I've seen this mood in you before and doubt the sincerity of your posting when I do see it.

ok but to narrow it down to the topic at hand, is anyone going to protest without justifying the action of protest to themselves?
I'd say it can be taken for granted the people protesting are justified, by someone at sometime even if it is themselves.

If that's the point khemical was making then I completely agree.

Usually if someone says "that's justified" they're talking about their opinion rather than meaning "that's justified in someone's mind at some point."

And as I previously said someone willing to die for a cause means nothing to any justification I'd place on a cause.
I'd have to judge it on factors other than if they're willing to die for it or not.

---

I don't know what black block is, I saw you reference it when talking to abaris before and didn't know what it meant then.

It's very simple. I'm talking about the merits of individual cases and applying the same standard universally.

So I can't say this group here has some merits based on the fact that they're willing to die for their cause but that cult over there is crazy because they're willing to die for their cause.

Radical suggestion...maybe their willingness to die for their cause is based upon something other than mental instability in both cases?  Like.....an actual grievance?  

(the black block are those people that abaris mentioned and, to hear you tell it, make bumfights videos and riot because it's cool and/or profitable, just out to start shit..you know, the only group of protesters you deigned to comment on specifically)

If I'm honest and non hypocritial then I have to judge both groups based on merits beyond the factor of how much their willing to die.

Omitting that commitment in your metrics probably won't give you a full view of their case, cause, and motivations.

And that works for any individual also.

Apparently not.  You've told us what you think about cults and crazy people and terrorists, but have avoided any specific assessment of a specific group wtih a specific set of grievances that have resorted to violence in specific instances.

Doesn't make sense at all.

If you say to me the moment someone is willing to die for a cause then it's justified, why would I include in my disagreement with you talk about peaceful or justified protesters.

Do you think I don't think sheep exist because I didnt mention sheep exist in my last post?

---

Also it doesn't make sense to say me and abaris are getting information from the same sources.

I specifically said I know nothing about black block and you were waffling on to me about black block assuming I know what you're talking about because abaris does

---

Thump
That's because your comparisons and analogies aren't germane to the conversation, and generally speaking I avoid arguing with you because you have a dolt's insistence on refusing to see any point other than your own ... as you're amply demonstrating here.

And you're a pretencious old shit head who refuses to see any other point other than their own.

[A Theist]

What certain point would that be, Thump? Are the issues getting close enough, yet, to where you and Rhythm 'have' to decide whether or not violence might be required?

Hah.  I'm the right shade of lipstick, a combat arms vet....and a married, middle aged property owner in an anomalously wealthy section of rural america.  Not only is our entire system set up to support and fellate me, I -could- open fire on a cop and not only survive...but some dipshit like you would laud me as resisting the evil federal oppressors.

I think you're fucking losing it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

And you're a pretencious old shit head who refuses to see any other point other than their own.

Lol, you took how many tries before you understood the.point being put to you, and i'm the one with blinders? Forgive my chortling, but you can't even level an insult with any sort of skill.

Pathetic, m'boy, simply pathetic.

[paulpablo]

Thump says..............
You're being intentionally the dullard, aren't you?

When someone takes an action, ipso facto that actor has decided that they are justified. Not Moe Bandy from South Fork, Indiana, not Thumpalumpacus from Texas, but that specific actor.

Then thump says.......
Nonsense. People do things they know aren't justified all the time. Are you on something that's affecting your thinking?

I don't know if you're calling yourself a dullard, or accusing yourself of being on something that's affecting your thinking.  It looks like it to me.

---

And you're a pretencious old shit head who refuses to see any other point other than their own.

Lol, you took how many tries before you understood the.point being put to you, and i'm the one with blinders? Forgive my chortling, but  you can't even level an insult with any sort of skill.

Pathetic, m'boy, simply pathetic.

I don't try and insult you.  You are old, your head is full of shit.  And you use phrases like ipso facto.

---

And yes it took me some time to realize that when someone said "that action is justified." they meant justified inside the head of the person doing that action.

Because of the fact I've never seen that word used like that before in my life.  I've never seen someone say "That's understandable.................I mean it's not understandable to me obviously...but someone understands it somewhere so it's understandable."

[dyresand]

It's a question which has occurred to me before.  At what point does oppression become bad enough that you need to fight back with more than words?  At what point do you abandon working within the system and seek instead to overthrow it?

When the state has too much power over the individual person to where their liberties and freedoms are at risk.
Which they are now because of certain programs.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't know if you're calling yourself a dullard, or accusing yourself of being on something that's affecting your thinking.  It looks like it to me.

Oh, shit, it's the old "I'm rubber and you're glue" comeback. Whatever shall I do?

I don't try and insult you.  You are old, your head is full of shit.  And you use phrases like ipso facto.

lol, and that irks you why? You dislike people who don't talk like you? You imagine that I'm worried about impressing -- or befuddling, as is more likely the case -- you?

It was a weak attempt at insult, and funny in its expression of effort while at the same time being so vacuous.

And yes it took me some time to realize that when someone said "that action is justified." they meant justified inside the head of the person doing that action.

Because of the fact I've never seen that word used like that before in my life.  I've never seen someone say "That's understandable.................I mean it's not understandable to me obviously...but someone understands it somewhere so it's understandable."

See, now we might be getting somewhere. There's a lot of value, I've found as I've grown old, of trying to see things from perspectives aside from one's own. Justification, like any other human emotion, is subjective ipso f -- er, by its very nature for being an emotion. I'm not sure why that should be so mysterious. People justify themselves all the time, and just as often, those justifications are rejected by others.