Riot Day in Ferguson, Missouri

[Burnt State]

The purpose of media hype over police killing black people is to create racial division, to make people think of each other in terms of class and race, not as individuals.

It's the Cultural Marxism you promote Burnt State. The idea is to destroy society so the Marxist "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" can seize control.

It's nothing new. Wall Street helped the Bolsheviks do it in Russia. Wall Street helped Mao do it in China.

Now Wall Street is turning America into a police state and destroying the petite bourgeoisie with taxes and regulation, just like you want.

You must be a surrealist...."The Marxist Dictatorship of The Proletariat" is simply not in the cards for America. The capitalist empire as driven by fascist corporate consumerism will be the ongoing malaise and it will always maintain an elitist class to run the servants drugged and busy cheering for their sports teams, as they do now so that in north America will continue to develop its vision of THX1138 meets Rollerball.

But while that path is being bushwhacked we will continue to see the rise of diversity and human rights, and ultimately that increasing claim for human rights as defined by feminism, anti-racism, gay rights and ableism, will stretch our capacity for what personhood means. Maybe then we will reject the corporate godhood's interpretation of what it means to be a person.

Just what is it about diversity and equity that scares you so?

 

[pixelsmith]

You must be a surrealist...."The Marxist Dictatorship of The Proletariat" is simply not in the cards for America. The capitalist empire as driven by fascist corporate consumerism will be the ongoing malaise and it will always maintain an elitist class to run the servants drugged and busy cheering for their sports teams, as they do now so that in north America will continue to develop its vision of THX1138 meets Rollerball.

But while that path is being bushwhacked we will continue to see the rise of diversity and human rights, and ultimately that increasing claim for human rights as defined by feminism, anti-racism, gay rights and ableism, will stretch our capacity for what personhood means. Maybe then we will reject the corporate godhood's interpretation of what it means to be a person.

Just what is it about diversity and equity that scares you so?

That's pretty funny coming from someone who is scared shitless of what he exhales. Look out! There's your shadow! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Burnt State]

That's pretty funny coming from someone who is scared shitless of what he exhales. Look out! There's your shadow! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dear Peter Pan, you might need to qualify your approach to dialogue by contextualing your denial of climate change so the rest of the audience understands what you're on about, or why you feel you need to kill a thread that was actually exploring something important like racism. I leave you to your martial linguistic arts instruction. Let's see how long this thread takes to be another dialogue of only two or three people in perpetual agreement of ignorance. That's why nothing ever gets accomplished on this earth - the gnawing, petulant voice of the bully, who only has insult to offer instead of ideas, must always rear it's head.

Let silence be your reward.

 

[pixelsmith]

Racism is being perpetuated as another means of population control. It ties together with the whole CO2 thing. Humans are evil and must be controlled. Right?

 

[Randall]

My view is the perp got what he deserved, when you look at his thuggish attitude in this video ... [see previous post ] ... And compare it to the officers version of what happened ... Brown seems to be someone who had decided the rule of law doesnt apply to him, and in making that decision in abandoning it, he also discards its protections.

I can't agree. I think that punishment needs to be reasonably proportionate to the crime. The death sentence for stealing some groceries and pushing one's weight around is grossly disproportionate. Pay restitution for the stolen property, apologize, and serve some time doing community service. That's reasonable. Painting an "open season" target on him isn't.

 

[manxman]

I agree with Randal, a smack in the mouth would of been enough for the first time, ambulance job for 2nd time, shoot him for 3 strikes.

 

[Muadib]

I can't agree. I think that punishment needs to be reasonably proportionate to the crime. The death sentence for stealing some groceries and pushing one's weight around is grossly disproportionate. Pay restitution for the stolen property, apologize, and serve some time doing community service. That's reasonable. Painting an "open season" target on him isn't.

I can agree with this, however, speaking as someone who made some mistakes early on and got into a bit of criminal mischief myself; ( I never used violence or the threat of violence, and I never stole from individuals or mom and pop stores, only big chain stores. Of course, I'm not suggesting that makes it right, but it's how I rationalized it during the depths of my battle with addiction) unless you're a complete moron, you have to be cognizant of the fact that when you're committing a crime, things can go drastically wrong in ways that you can't always anticipate. If you're willing to use violence or the threat of violence to accomplish your criminal goals, well, you have to expect that violence is going to be used against you in return, especially if you're dealing with law enforcement.

That's why the whole Michael Brown thing doesn't really bother me that much if I'm honest. It does on the level that perhaps it could have been handled better, but that's easy to say after the fact. Things like the recent case here in my home city of Cleveland, where an officer received a report of a 12 year old on a playground waving around a possibly fake gun and instead of following procedure and attempting to defuse the situation, he simply drove up and shot the kid within 2 seconds. That bothers me alot more than a guy who robbed a store, refused to comply with the police and was then shot. He knew the risks, he took a chance and it went bad, he never would've died if he had just given up when he knew he was caught. It's a shame that it turned out the way it did, but imo there's nothing there that screams racial injustice.

 

[Tyger]

That bothers me a lot more than a guy who robbed a store, refused to comply with the police and was then shot. He knew the risks, he took a chance and it went bad, he never would've died if he had just given up when he knew he was caught. It's a shame that it turned out the way it did, but imo there's nothing there that screams racial injustice.

I disagree with the logic. He never should have died. He should never have had to know that was the risk. It shouldn't be the risk. There's something wrong that that is the risk.

What I Wasn't Taught In School

TEXT: "Published on Oct 23, 2014
"Word On The Curb presents a Spoken word short film for those frustrated at Black History teaching in schools.

Disillusioned student Samuel King relays his grievances to his teacher that Black History Month isn't taught with as much depth and with as much pride in schools. Samuel engages in a short rebuttal with his teacher, before arguing that education in school does little to satisfy his thirst for knowledge of influential people in Black history who seem to be elusive in the curriculum. Samuel names the likes of Patricia E. Bath, King Musa I of Mali, Mary Prince, Sir Trevor McDonald, Ella Baker, Septimius Severus, Fuse ODG, Jamal Edwards, Garrett Morgan and Kwame Nkrumah as individuals he could be taught about.

" "There seems to be a lot you haven't told us, and you shut down and hold back on the bold ones who stand against the way you're trying to mould us." "

 

[Charlie Prime]

You must be a surrealist...."The Marxist Dictatorship of The Proletariat" is simply not in the cards for America.

I have news for you. The "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" was a scam, and you fell for it. Communism/Socialism was designed and implemented by Oligharchs because it's the most ingenious system for farming humans that has ever been developed.

You are the typical child-like leftist refugee from the Catholic Church who replaced the SkyGod with The State. You believe some Great Father above must exist to punish the wicked, and a some Great Mother above must exist to comfort the weak. You think humans are inherently bad, and would never be good and charitable on their own. Some benevolent, wise Force Above force above must use threats and violence to make them do it. You are classic.

Just what is it about diversity and equity that scares you so?

I love diversity and equity. What I don't like is people like you who promote group violence.

 

[Burnt State]

Ok, you have your weird paradigm about leftists looking for god or mom or pop but that doesn't fit in with my self-determinist, peaceful collective which is the ultimate drive behind equity and diversity work. My argument is for human rights - the same argument that feminism makes. Just what kind of group violence are you on about Charlie, as you really baffle me with your retorts?

Please point out exactly where it was that I advocated violence.

 

[mike]

I disagree with the logic. He never should have died. He should never have had to know that was the risk. It shouldn't be the risk. There's something wrong that that is the risk.

If the Police officers testimony is true, that he was struggling with him, trying to take his gun........

Struggle with a man with a gun, and that is always going to be the risk (getting shot)

 

[Charlie Prime]

he simply drove up and shot the kid within 2 seconds.

Did you see my video above where the cop murdered the 19 year-old girl for attempting to drive away from a party?

I suspect the purpose of this ridiculous Michael Brown thing is to make anyone who says police are out of control look bad.

They used this tactic with the Vietnam Anti-war Movement. Before the CIA invented the hippie "movement", protesters against the war in Vietnam were normal, every-day people who wanted the U.S. out of Indochina. After hippies took up the antiwar cause, no normal person wanted to be associated with it. Consequently, that war dragged on for many more years. Corporations made billions more in war profits.

 

[Charlie Prime]

Just what kind of group violence are you on about Charlie, as you really baffle me with your retorts?Please point out exactly where it was that I advocated violence.

Burnt, you are too far gone to comprehend what I'm talking about. You are lost in the old 19th century socialist paradigm. Your mind has been trained for decades to reject reason and evidence, and accept sophistry and logical fallacies as reality. This is evidenced by your non-sense statements I pointed out above.

If you honestly wish to understand why group violence is immoral, I will attempt to show you. Most often people like you immediately recoil and run away when presented with the evidence because they instantly detect that clear thinking is a threat to their worldview.

Please watch this short, simplified video:

 

[Burnt State]

Burnt, you are too far gone to comprehend what I'm talking about.

I understand from the video that you have a very strange notion about how social justice works, and certainly no clue as to how equity and diversity work together in society. You seem to be afriad of taxes, or people (i.e. gov't) shaking you down for them, but then not everyone wants to pay their fair share I suppose.

Regardless, the question put to you was, "Please explain where it was that I ever advocated violence, group or individual, in this discussion about how to achieve equity in society." Do you really believe that sacrificing things you can afford to sacrifice i.e. the primo parking spot at the grocery store for the pregnant person, is equal to committing some kind of social violence against the person who saw that parking spot first? Is it all about not having to feel guilt about being privileged?

Your invention of alternate realities is utterly fascinating to me and I would like to understand better how you twist the creation of an equitable society as I outlined above into group violence? Did the Logan's Run bit confuse you, as that was obvious humor? However I do notice this very interesting response you are constructing around how equitable processes such as the use of politically correct language, or making things fair for others by sharing resources and privileges somehow are "violent events" like somehow donating your extra food at a food bank is like punching someone, but who is getting hit I can't quite figure out. No wonder Pixel supports this faulty logic.

I've never really met that kind of push back before regarding equity discussions. So let's drop the evasion tactics and stick to the facts about equity. Is it that you can not bear to give up your privilege? Is that what you are trying to say in the video, that your implicit guilt for not donating to the dude's college fund has concocted this paranoia about state agents that will threaten you to share your wealth and this should be guarded against, before it happens no less, lest our whole society take up sharing and collectivism in order to help each other out? Is that the deal, really?

Because listen dude, no one's coming to your home to tell you to give up your privilege or your attitudes around it. The only request is that you keep such biases to yourself so that the rest of the world can play nice in the sandbox together. You don't have to give up squat and if you feel guilty about that please just keep that to yourself and refrain from sharing such weirdo concepts with others lest more people get infected with such surrealist remorse. It's simply not productive, a waste of misplaced emotion even.

 

[Tyger]

You are the typical child-like leftist refugee from the Catholic Church who replaced the SkyGod with The State. You believe some Great Father above must exist to punish the wicked, and a some Great Mother above must exist to comfort the weak. You think humans are inherently bad, and would never be good and charitable on their own. Some benevolent, wise Force Above force above must use threats and violence to make them do it. You are classic.

I think you've got it twisted up - you certainly are mis-reading Burnt State in spades.

This is who you are describing -

Ayn Rand First Interview 1959 (Full)

 

[Charlie Prime]

I understand from the video that you have a very strange notion about how social justice works, and certainly no clue as to how equity and diversity work together in society.

I ask you a simple question:

Is is moral to aggress against other people?

 

[Burnt State]

I do not believe in aggression towards other people. I believe in free will and choice, which s why equity work is a thirty-forty year process to transform institutions into equitable spaces. You can't force goodness or morality. For equity to work people must believe in the choices they make. It takes decades to alter culture.

Answering questions by asking questions is a child's game. If you can not explain how you equate violence with the basic principles of equity then you need to climb down from your soapbox and let other voices in. What I've outlined above are the basic fundamental principles of equity the world over. You see these as violent and I can only assume, as you can't explain your wild critique, that you have some serious privilege issues.

 

[Charlie Prime]

I do not believe in aggression towards other people.

If that is true, you should integrate non-aggression into your life by rejecting anything which promotes aggression against others.

I understand how difficult that can be, but it’s worth it man. I know you imagine a world where peace and cooperation are the highest values. I do too. The first step toward achieving that dream to accepting the Non-Aggression Principle.

Open your mind and be willing to critically examine your beliefs. Peaceful people need your help.

 

[Burnt State]

If that is true, you should integrate non-aggression into your life by rejecting anything which promotes aggression against others.

I understand how difficult that can be, but it’s worth it man. I know you imagine a world where peace and cooperation are the highest values. I do too. The first step toward achieving that dream to accepting the Non-Aggression Principle.

Open your mind and be willing to critically examine your beliefs. Peaceful people need your help.

Dude, you have yet to explain what's aggressive about anything explained to you about equity and diversity principles. I understand you want to take that Orwellian politician's approach by repeating it over and over again, but that won't make it true. You can try to keep doing that, but that's troll behavior and it's also the worst part of any politician's approach to selling an idea: repetition. But repeating lies just proves that you're a liar. Do you have anything else to offer?

What's aggressive about equity?

 

[manxman]

I understand him burnt, he could be less in your face about it, what ever society you get is going to involve violence against the individual by majority consent, no matter how well intentioned the majority are, in a nutshell.

Everybody has a commitment to the society they are born into, they break it, they get punished, they commit again or leave and commit to another society where theres different requirements to fit in, and they commit there, or they face punishment of the majority there if they dont fit in..

No-one is free, its a myth, no matter your politics, your philosophies, the colour of your skin,
everyone is owned by everyone, when you live in a truly free society.

He believes you are a fantasist, a dreamer of the literally impossible, but could have chose his words better.

Theres no escaping it, there are not any Utopian scenario's that are not fantasy, he lost patience with you.

I think.

My opinion you cannot have any type of society without rule, whoever makes the rules is irrelevant as is the philosophy followed, you havent got society without rule, you have the law of the jungle, and you wouldnt like that.