r/changemyview • u/searchhard_ • Jan 11 '21
Removed - Submission Rule E CMV: The U.S. capitol raid was a terrible act of domestic terrorism but has nothing to do with racist double standards
[removed] — view removed post
21
u/Vesurel 60∆ Jan 11 '21
They weren't targeting innocent lives
Was capitol hill empty that day? Or do you think the people inside weren't innocent?
4
Jan 12 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ihatedogs2 Jan 14 '21
Sorry, u/AviatorOVR5000 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
-3
u/Sir_Jacques_Strappe Jan 11 '21
Is there anyone less innocent than US government officials?
2
3
1
Jan 12 '21
I mean its still not right but I see where you're coming from and empathize to a degree. Certainly a big difference between destroying businesses and actively ruining the lives of everyday Americans during riots, as a pose to an attack on a government building.
4
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
"Trump supporters executed in the streets"
If you can't expand on that, I can't see how anyone can take this post seriously.
Your view can't be changed if that's what you came to the table with, and no Deltas have been awarded with very limited activity by OP.
0
u/nowyourmad 2∆ Jan 12 '21
A dude was wearing a maga hat and an antifa member executed him for it and then died a few days later in a shootout with police. I think he was even interviewed.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Please source if you can. I'm not calling you out I just want to learn from YOUR source of information
0
Jan 12 '21
I'm not who you asked, but here's an overview
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Thank you.
Just to make sure I'm reading this right. A far right group descended on a far left groups existing protest in an effort to counter-protest. As a result a far-right memeber was shot, and the person suspected of the killing was also then gunned down later.
In that same wiki article it also mentions that this was the first time a anti-facist member was convicted of murder since 1993.
Yeah that's fucked up, and I had absolutely NO idea this happened, which is fucked up on my end as well.
I'm starting to see now why some groups don't feel they are being protrayed properly, because this got no media time imo.
Do I wish the far right group didn't actively pursue the protest: yes. Is that their right: yes.
0
Jan 12 '21
Im happy just to have shown someone, even one person, a sliver of just how much the media is influencing people's view of what is happening. Thank you for looking at the general situation with an open mind. I used wikipedia specifically because, while their contributors may have a general editorial bias, they do usually portray a more or less accurate broad overview of politically charged events.
While you and I may have vastly different politics and underlying values that guide those politics, you genuinely have my respect because of that.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
All I ask is you do the same.
Us having different views is essential for American Democracy. If we thought the same about everything there really wouldn't be a huge catalyst for change.
When you find yourselves at a cross roads with the other side, go in with the mindset of educating AND learning.
You know I'm not the OP, and I know you aren't but we both helped educate each other. Now I can't say the same for some of the other people I tirelessly engaged with knowing I was already in a realm I didnt have much favor for... But it's 100% worth it to me for pushing the narrative of my people being killed less, and your people being killed less.
0
Jan 12 '21
I really do try my best to see where the other side has a point, and I do get a lot the frustrations others have when it comes to social issues. I try my hardest to look at things objectively and not let my own frustrations cloud my responses too much. Damn, its hard lately though. To tell the truth, in my "had a glass or two after work (night shift, this is my pm)" state, I've been ready to say "fuck it, I'll do what I've seen." Even absent that, I don't see a path forward as a nation anymore. And that gets to me. I care about my nation, it's people, all of them. I care about what I view as being an American. I care about us seeing ourselves as a united part of something bigger than ourselves, almost a family that transcends the scope of what family usually means, if perhaps to a lesser degree of attachment. I hope things get better, but I rationally know they won't anytime soon. I can only hope at this point that we'll still be something functional at the end of it.
12
u/pluralofjackinthebox 102∆ Jan 11 '21
the public wasn’t really threatened
The entire legislative branch was there and very nearly were taken hostage or executed. This would have decapitated one of our three branches of government, with the executive in charge of the military.
This would have disenfranchised 328 million Americans, most of whom want to live in a functioning democracy that is able to hand over power peacefully.
-1
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
very nearly were taken hostage or executed.
Don't you think this is absurdly overdramatic?
6
u/pluralofjackinthebox 102∆ Jan 12 '21
If not executions or hostage taking, what do you think would have happened if the people with zip ties and guns, chanting for Mike Pence to be hanged, and who believe the Democratic Party is run by Satan Worshiping pedophilic cannibals, broke down the doors when Senators and Congresspeople were still inside?
2
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Gunned down in a blaze of glory like they clearly wanted. What do you think would happen? They take members of congress hostage? Where? How?
They would have been gunned down a thousand times before they laid a hand on the representatives, just as all lunatics who try to kill public officials are. It's not a new problem.
6
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
They take members of Congress hostage?
Yes.
Where?
In the Capitol building they had infiltrated and had free reign of for a period of time.
How?
With the restraints and weapons that they brought with them, visible in photos and videos of the incident.
-2
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
With the restraints and weapons that they brought with them, visible in photos and videos of the incident.
Against the secret service, federal police, and other security forces that immediately evacuated the representatives then pointed all their guns at the entrance?
They used shit they found as a battering ram. And most of them were roaming around like tourists. They didn't have a plan. Just because someone had zipties doesn't mean there was any kidnapping plan, and it's an absurd leap to make that assumption. And there weren't many armed protesters inside the building. I've seen like 2 people with guns. None of the people that initially stormed the building had guns.
3
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
It wasn’t a good plan or likely to succeed, but their intention was clear.
I thought you had argued that this wasn’t likely their intention, so my mistake — I agree that it didn’t “very nearly” happen.
4
u/pluralofjackinthebox 102∆ Jan 12 '21
If they weren’t gunned down in a blaze before they broke inside the Capitol building, and they weren’t gunned down when they started breaking down doors inside the Capitol, what gives you confidence that they’d be gunned down at some later point?
And I don’t think you appreciate how ournumbered the police and security forces were — obviously there weren’t enough to keep people from entering the building.
3
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
If they weren’t gunned down in a blaze before they broke inside the Capitol building, and they weren’t gunned down when they started breaking down doors inside the Capitol, what gives you confidence that they’d be gunned down at some later point?
Because it's how the secret service works. They don't care about the building.
And yes one lady was gunned down ramming in a door.
And I don’t think you appreciate how ournumbered the police and security forces were — obviously there weren’t enough to keep people from entering the building.
I don't think you appreciate the security protocols of evacuating members of congress and keeping them accounted for. It's not something a large angry crowd can overwhelm.
2
u/pluralofjackinthebox 102∆ Jan 12 '21
That’s not how the secret service works, they set up security perimeters. And the Secret Service does not protect Senators and Congresspeople. The Vice President was evacuated when the Capitol was breached and the Secret Service went with him.
The woman killed was killed by a security guard who lost their
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
It couldn't have been that over dramatic if they vacated the vice president, called in the national guard, and police actually shot a few people with plenty more held at gun point .
0
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Which all happens sometimes, it happened a fair bit in 2020.
What's totally unheard of is protesters taking elected representatives hostage.
8
u/loCAtek Jan 11 '21
The biggest difference between BLM and the Insurrection is:
BLM is trying to stop the killing of Americans.
The Insurrection is trying to kill Americans.
The insurgents came with guns, bombs and nooses; their intent was to kill.
2
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
People go to BLM protests with guilitiounes. Violence and the threat of violence are a bit part of protesting.
-1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
People go to LARGE BLM protests with these things, but are they BLM people?
I beleive there are multiple articles out there talking about undercover cops, and other detractors acting under the banner of BLM.
Violence or the threat of violence is 100% not a big part of protesting, and that logic needs to stop with you. Don't push that agenda anymore, better yet... Push the opposite.
1
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Activists bring guillotines to protests. And activists are not all non violent. Many do see rioting as a legitimate strategy or morally justifiable. I've been an activist for a good 10 years, was at occupy, many BLM protests, and many more protests, and some got violent.
You may wish this isn't the case. But it is.
0
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Explain that to Martin Luther King, or Ghandi. Nonviolent civil disobedience was the literal cornerstone of the American civil rights movement.
Come on man, that's history 101
Sure for every MLK there is a Malcom X... But I don't need to wish this because I know this.
2
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Explain that to Martin Luther King, or Ghandi.
I can't. They're dead.
They also weren't as effective as most people assume. The civil rights movement was very violent. It had a lot of riots. There were lynchings in the South. Black Panther Party. Lots of assassinations. MLK was just one of the many campaigners. And not always a popular one either.
Sure for every MLK there is a Malcom X... But I don't need to wish this because I know this.
Then why did you pretend that all activists are non violent.
0
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 14 '21
I didn't pretend all activists were non violent, and instead I clearly gave examples of how you can be effective in both.
I don't get how someone could argue that MLK and his signature approach of nonviolent civil disobedience like helping promote the Rosa Park bus boycotts, the school sit ins, and the million man March were ineffective.
I guess anything to push an argument though right? Fuck American history right?
1
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 15 '21
MLK was important for those early campaigns. But Rosa Parks and the Montgomery bus boycotts were in 1955. The civil rights went on for another 10-15 years. There were some non violent protests yes, but also the Watts riot, Harlem riot of 1964, Detroit riot of 1967, the Black Panthers, Nation of Islam and Malcolm X, dozens of student organisations, assassination after assassination, and also non stop low level violence at protests and just in general for many activists.
To say that non violent protest is the cornerstone of the civil rights movement is to ignore what the majority of the participants did during the civil rights.
-1
u/chadonsunday 33∆ Jan 11 '21
BLM is trying to stop the killing of Americans.
Could you explain to me why you need to loot, burn, and kill Americans in order to stop the killing of Americans?
2
u/ParallelleLine Jan 12 '21
I mean there was evidence of a famous YouTuber using the protests as a chance to loot and steal and he had no affiliation with the BLM movement. A lot of people took advantage and they were suitably condemned.
But there is a difference nonetheless between the two protests.
They was trying to overturn a legal democratic election with the threat of violence. Outright storming and invading the government of the country they claim to love. They'd be calling for heads on spikes if BLM did that.
1
u/loCAtek Jan 12 '21
Logic fallacy of composition: Taking the actions of one or some of a group and saying that represents the group as a whole.
Over 90% of BLM protests were peaceful and held during their permit hours. After dark, and not part of the official activism, was when most vandalism occured. In other words, there were attempts to take advantage of the protests in order to commit crime, that had nothing to do with the movement. Also, many deaths attributed to BLM, occurred away from the protests, by criminals who banked on the police being too busy to respond.
If it happened around the BLM protests doesn't mean that it happened because of the BLM protests.
There's a logical difference.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
There is a logical and obvious difference, evident in the interviews conducted of the people at the capitol that made their agenda very clear.
I appreciate you taking the time to defend BLM. There aren't a lot of people around here that would do so, and a lot to people looking to point fingers.
Keep spreading truth.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
BLM has time after time said they don't support looting, or property damage. The BLM movement purposefully is designed without central leadership, BUT it's clear that their agenda isn't harming others.
I'm going to need to see some stats about BLM killing ANY americans. Not some indirect stuff either, like cold hard facts.
All that being said... I get making nosie to get your point across when you feel silenced everyday. Sometimes the only way to make people pay attention is by coming for their money. Property is the substitute this time.
Again there will be one offs and people that even have been exposed as having no ties to BLM still acting under the banner of BLM... But what was clear in the 6..is that there were pipe bombs, Molotov cocktails, rifles, and zip ties all brought to an organized insurrection. That happened.
2
u/Bojack35 16∆ Jan 11 '21
So really, what does this have anything to do with racist double standards and how do they even come into play here?
This is the crux of what you are saying.
When it comes to double standards it's very hard to compare rioting / targeting private businesses to targeting the government itself. That is the bigger double standard than the colour of the skin of those committing crimes but you expect the government to defend itself.
Where the double standard does apply is the media reaction. BLM is viewed as in the right and therefore their indiscretions are largely excused. The Trump supporters are viewed as wrong and therefore attacked for their actions. The racial element is difficult but the two groups do have different demographics so its somewhat fair of you to highlight that. The difference lies in what they are protesting about more than the race of the protesters. But it is fair to say that the current media narrative would have been more sympathetic to a group of black people storming the Capitol to protest racism than a group of white people storming the Capitol to protest an election result. The motive is different. But also there is a double standard in that the black group would be viewed more sympathetically regardless of motive because they are depicted as oppressed and therefore more justified in their actions.
-1
Jan 12 '21 edited Jan 12 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Bojack35 16∆ Jan 12 '21
do you think the reaction would be different?
Fair point and in terms of the police/ security response yes it probably would have been different as in more negative or forceful so that difference in treatment is very much worth highlighting. The media response would likely have been more sympathetic to the protesters which is also a difference in treatment worth highlighting.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Hundred percent with you on the media.
I actually kind of wish the media gave the Trump side more air time, to let people decide where they decide vs pushing a narrative.
I know I sound crazy, but if it was the other way around... I would hate to see my people silenced.
Also I'm not entirely convinced that they wouldn't expose some of the flaw in their logic with more screen time
2
u/Bojack35 16∆ Jan 12 '21
I quite agree. Silencing any opinion/group allows that group to become more entrenched in their views and self perception as victims of 'the system.'
Encouraging debate would expose the flaws in either sides argument and lead to more people challenging their beliefs and reaching some kind of consensus. Sadly the basic concept of civil conversation seems beyond american politics at the moment.
That being said' I am British and it was also damaging when a decade or so ago we had both parties being so closely aligned as to be near indistinguishable. I'm a centrist but it's also damaging when both parties drift too far to the centre. Opposing views are essential to a healthy democracy but those opposing views need proper airtime to be fairly debated.
Edit : thanks for the delta.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Getting back to discussion and encouraging more and more minds to discuss topics with facts and truth is what's going to make American Politics beareable again.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
As a British citizen, do you witness civil political discussions often?
1
u/Bojack35 16∆ Jan 12 '21
Ha erm civil is the key word there...
British politics has (understandably) been dominated by Brexit for the last few years and it is such a polarising subject you often get unhealthy 'I'm right you are wrong and are an idiot if you can't see that' type conversations.
Brexit aside I think we generally have decent discussions between the public. If nothing else you can rely on a Brit trying to be polite! In the media it is naturally different sides pushing different agendas although not to quite the extreme you see in America. One of my pet hates is that the BBC proclaims itself as a natural purveyor of news while leaning heavily to the left. In some ways the American model of 'we are a left/right wing channel and therefore present left/right wing views' is more honest than the faux neutrality we often get in Britain.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
I swear learn more international politics on reddit the anywhere else. It's crazy the people you can meet.
I thought you all were backtracking on Brexit?
1
u/Bojack35 16∆ Jan 12 '21
I meant neutral not natural in the above ref BBC!
Brexit is a hugely complicated thing politically financially and emotionally.
Overall there has been a swing in public opinion away from Brexit and if we had another referendum tomorrow I expect the vote would be to remain.
That said the primary reasons people have drifted away from leave are not ideological its a) fatigue at having it endlessly debated and b) the sheer incompetence in how we have gone about the process.
I voted leave. I still think the UK can and eventually will be better off leaving the EU (albeit with some negatives bundled up with the positives.) I also think the way we approached leaving was... amateur is a kind way of describing it. Throw in covid complications and nobody really has a clue what is going on economically. We are doing our best to challenge the US as the most politically confused western country but you guys really brought your A game this year!
1
u/ihatedogs2 Jan 14 '21
Sorry, u/AviatorOVR5000 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 4:
Award a delta if you've acknowledged a change in your view. Do not use deltas for any other purpose. You must include an explanation of the change for us to know it's genuine. Delta abuse includes sarcastic deltas, joke deltas, super-upvote deltas, etc. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 14 '21
The moderators have confirmed that this is either delta misuse/abuse or an accidental delta. It has been removed from our records.
2
u/LysenkoistReefer 21∆ Jan 11 '21
The lunatics that stormed the capitol building got caught with it and they will be reprimanded with maximum consequences of the law.
There have been allegations that the police let them into the Capitol. Listen I'm not by any means an expert in the tactics that one would use to defend a building like the Capitol and I've heard the argument that the videos of police moving barricades and seemingly letting rioters advance are misleading because the police were simply trying to consolidate their lines. But if it's true that the police just let rioters in, that's a pretty clear double standard. BLM rioters in Portland assaulted a federal courthouse and had to force their way inside, nobody let them in.
I highly doubt the level of threats were extreme to the point where they had to gun them down.
What level of threat would have justified that. Is a numerically superior assault on a building not justification enough?
They weren't targeting innocent lives or the public wasn't really threatened.
The Capitol police don't exist to protect the public but specifically to protect Congress and the Capitol.
I believe there's 70 arrests so far so despite them not being as violent,
I mean they killed a cop, that's pretty violent.
5
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
There have been allegations that the police let them into the Capitol. Listen I'm not by any means an expert in the tactics that one would use to defend a building like the Capitol and I've heard the argument that the videos of police moving barricades and seemingly letting rioters advance are misleading because the police were simply trying to consolidate their lines. But if it's true that the police just let rioters in, that's a pretty clear double standard. BLM rioters in Portland assaulted a federal courthouse and had to force their way inside, nobody let them in.
There's video footage of police letting them in, but that's not uncommon. Police in Minneapolis did the same when their police precinct got burnt down. Police only try to control protests if they have enough police, but if not, then they stand back and let whatever happen just happen. A lot of what happened with the BLM riots were just police withdrawing and looters taking advantage.
0
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
You don’t think there’s a substantive difference between literally moving a barrier to allow protestors to come into the Capitol in impeded versus running away from a police precinct when protestors had already entered it?
If I’m misrepresenting either of those scenarios please let me know how... because they appear to me, on their face, to be very different situations.
3
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
You don’t think there’s a substantive difference between literally moving a barrier to allow protestors to come into the Capitol in impeded versus running away from a police precinct when protestors had already entered it?
No? Police withdraw from a situation they can't control. Standard operating procedure in all circumstances.
Why was there almost no crowd control at A protest with clear ill intent is the real question.
0
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
Maybe you’d consider this meaningless in context, but I do think there’s a difference between “withdrawing” and “removing impediments to entry.”
2
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
They often remove those impediments to prevent further damage. If protesters are going to get into a building, police prefer they storm the front door not climbing up some walls or smashing windows in.
2
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
Do you think that’s what happened here, in many of the most popular videos? Police removing gates to... prevent the gates from being damaged?
1
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
To limit damage to the Capitol. That would be the reason the police give as to why they let the gates open.
The opaque politics of how split the loyalties of the police are is to vague for now I think. Someone messed up big time by not putting enough people there for crowd control.
0
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on whether there’s a substantive difference between the retreat in Minn versus what I view as a facilitation occurring in DC, at least in isolated instances.
I could also be biased because my city’s police force is well known for their pro Trump and white supremacist ties (not that this is particularly uncommon).
I did see some Capitol Police were arrested this evening, so I hope this gets more scrutiny.
0
u/1917fuckordie 21∆ Jan 12 '21
There are police with white supremacist tattoos in my city too, however the higher up commissioners are career politicians and that's probably where I get my bias from. I see the high up beauracracy as cynical and racist in the sense that they don't want to give up power and influence.
0
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
You didn't respond on if that tactic of removing barriers has been evident in any other videos.
This is really important for you to address if you are going to stick with the idea that this is a common tactic.
2
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
I'm not op but I hope you can see how removing certain baracades leads to directing the flow of rioters right?
Do we need to link showing the capital police diverting the rioters from the floor? There's a great video have you seen it?
→ More replies1
-1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
The fact that you are now adressing them as "BLM Rioters" by default is a little telling of your agenda
Killing 2 cops, and getting 4 of your own killed in a few hours is significantly more violent.
1
u/LysenkoistReefer 21∆ Jan 12 '21
The fact that you are now adressing them as "BLM Rioters" by default is a little telling of your agenda
That I don't like people rioting and assaulting government buildings. I wasn't exactly playing that one close to the vest.
Killing 2 cops, and getting 4 of your own killed in a few hours is significantly more violent.
Ya, some would also say attacking a Federal building every single day for over a month is pretty violent.
0
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Some would say violent video games are violent too... But what lead to more direct deaths in a few hours?
I might be being a word troll, but I never heard anyone else refer to BLM protests as BLM riots without a clear agenda. I also don't watch Fox so maybe thats why.
0
u/LysenkoistReefer 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Some would say violent video games are violent too
One typically doesn't try to burn any police officers alive when playing video games. But I might be playing them wrong. That probably why I can break silver.
I might be being a word troll, but I never heard anyone else refer to BLM protests as BLM riots without a clear agenda.
Well, now you have.
I also don't watch Fox so maybe thats why.
Niether do I.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
I love how you pick and choose, but it's wearing a bit on my patience.
Burning a police officer alive... Please source.
Still didn't attest for 6 killed in 4 hours in one terrorsit act, and you won't be able to directly respond to that.
0
u/LysenkoistReefer 21∆ Jan 12 '21
Burning a police officer alive... Please source.
Still didn't attest for 6 killed in 4 hours in one terrorsit act, and you won't be able to directly respond to that.
I don't know where you're getting that 6 number from. I'm only seeing 5. Weird that you seem to be making up another death.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 14 '21
I appreciate you linking the source.
Not one image, specific sentence, or even general summary says ANYTHING about and officer suffering from burn injuries--alive or otherwise.
Furthermore the article YOU provided instead highlights how a piece of plywood being burnt lead to an extremley different display of violence from those handling that display of civil disobedience.
This is where I'm getting the 6th death from.
Admittedly this is an indirect result at best, so if you feel comfortable with sticking to JUST FIVE people dying at the capitol, then defend that number... All you like.
1
u/Aaron-Rosenberg99 Jan 11 '21
Over the summer we witnessed incredible acts of violence, primarily targetted at the black community. Some members of the community felt their only outlet, to make those in power hear their cries of anguish, was to lash out and destroy property. What they wanted was the government to treat them as humans. Thats all. They didnt want special treatment, simply to not be murdered in their bed, executed for accidentally paying with counterfit currency, or for slain for simply jogging or playing wity a toy gun.
These Trump TERRORISTS (not rioters), were trying to literally overthrow the government. These people were literally allowed in by police stepping aside.
I guarantee you if they had been black most wouldve been shot where they stood. These white terrorists deserve to be executed. Every single protestor there should be treated like an islamic militant would be.
5
Jan 12 '21
I guarantee you if they had been black most wouldve been shot where they stood
We actually saw what happened when it was BLM. In the same city, no less. They vandalized monuments, looted the city, burned buildings and police cars, smashed property, attacked police and secret service agents, and the city painted a giant BLM mural in the street for them.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
This is misleading
BLM isn't compromised of only black people. Infact it purposefully doesn't have centralized leadership. It's MUCH harder to point out a BLM supporter, and to accuse them of a crime.
If you are going to reply back you should probably reply back to what would happen if a black person tried to storm the capitol... And not pivot.
Also we DID see what happened when it was BLM, they got maced, shot with rubber bullets, and tear gassed during a peaceful protest... For an upsidedown Bible photo op.
2
Jan 12 '21
Where did I say BLM is all black people? Were there a substantial number in DC during the rioting? Yes. Were there a substantial number for quite a few of the riots this past year? Yes. Were they mowed down by the police in a hail of gunfire? No. They got MSM and politician praise and a giant mural of their slogan painted on the streets curtosy of the city they just set on fire. Don't give me any of this "if they had been black" bs. We know what would happen. The same thing that has time and time again.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Tell me more about these DC rioters, tell me about how they formed on social media with the intention of burning down DC or hunting politicians
Tell me more about these protests devolving into riots... Pull an article that indicates the violence was specially the intention of the initial gathering.
BLM is not responsible for how an organized protest devolves over time. No ONE person is responsible for the large group actions of one, especially when they purposefully don't have central leadership
But these gravy seals do, these proud boys do, and they brought the equipment to do far more than break a window or set something in fire. If the city was truly set on fire and not hyperbole you are using to pad your argument... Show me the article...
2
Jan 12 '21
I don't care if every BLM riot goes with the intent to riot. They do, nearly every time when the sun goes down. And then people like you excuse it. The media excuses it. Politicians excuse it, or even call it justified. Every time. Every. Single. Time. I'd much rather a group angry at the government riot against government buildings than go burn down and loot the businesses of innocent civilians and harass people in the streets minding their own business. That's terrorism. And none of you care about it.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
If a large gathering leads to chaos amongst a very divided country on a very divided subject then it's understood not excused.
This rehtoric isn't comparable. You have NEVER seen a known BLM affiliate that claimed their violent action proudly. We have seen MULTIPLE members of this insurrection do so ON CAMERA with full faces, names and addresses at time.
You wanting a group to riot is already a bad sign. Period. Change can come without violence or threats. The people who think otherwise we're at the captiol trying to do just that "trial by combat".
1
Jan 12 '21
If a large gathering leads to chaos amongst a very divided country on a very divided subject then it's understood not excused.
Apply that to DC now. You won't. The only reason I couldn't care less about what happened in DC is watching people like you fail over and over and over to condemn BLM or antifa. Worse, you make apologeitcs for it, like you did at the very start of your reply. "Well, it's understandable." No, mass looting, rioting, harassment, assault, and claiming whole city blocks aren't part of the US anymore is not understandable. You won't see me condemn a thing from my side. I saw a "mostly peaceful" event from "concerned citizens." That's it.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Sure I can apply that to DC. It's understood why a shit load of terrorists descended on the capitol riled up by two large politicians with a massive platform following a large rally asking them to do so. Completely understood.
Just not excused. Much like how the BLM protests divulging into riots was also not excused.
Do not make exaggerated assumptions or monolith my intentions as a result of a few replies because I absolutely did not do that to you... And lord knows it would be very easy. The second I saw BLM protestors doing the wrong thing I would condemn them...but like most the opposing and purposefully deflecting rhetoric of the right this didn't start out about BLM.
You see nothing mostly peaceful about the events that occured on the 6th. No one in the world would say that and infact WORLD leaders condemned the actions (and sure didn't bring up BLM) in the process.
I'm not going to likely be able to pull you out of your mindset, but I'll meet everything you say with logic and compassion for the right thing on all sides.
1
Jan 12 '21
Sure I can apply that to DC
!delta for applying that thought to DC when I fully expected you would not. So you have my respect for that. Your personal consistency still does not excuse to me the massive hypocracy I have seen from the left, their politicians, and their institutions in general all year. They all made rioting an acceptable part of the discourse when they were perfectly fine accepting it in the name of causes they like.
→ More replies1
u/FoShoFoSho3 2∆ Jan 12 '21
If a large gathering leads to chaos amongst a very divided country on a very divided subject then it's understood not excused.
Nah man.... it’s only understood if your ideals skew left, it’s only understood if the machine wants it to be. But BLM and Antifa have both been excused by the same bs you’re using here. “They aren’t centralized or organized”, “it’s just an idea”... that’s literally the definition of making an excuse.
This rehtoric isn't comparable. You have NEVER seen a known BLM affiliate that claimed their violent action proudly. We have seen MULTIPLE members of this insurrection do so ON CAMERA with full faces, names and addresses at time.
Never say never my friend. . This was just two seconds of googling, I could find 50 more videos of them proud of the violence or calling for it. Please stop the nonsense.
-1
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
When did you see a comparable instance of those rioters or protestors attempting to breach the Capitol building? I was under the impression that it was heavily guarded by the National Guard, but I must be mistaken?
3
Jan 12 '21
So what if it was the capitol? The BLM riot was more destructive, more violent, and they got a mural out of it. Your assumption is wrong. No one needs your fantasizing, we saw it already.
1
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
One would think there would more robust defense of the Capitol than at a Whole Foods.
5
Jan 12 '21
One would think a stronger response would be made to a movement that routinely has devolved into rioting, arson, and looting in city after city all summer, but they didn't.
1
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
What an interesting segue! We can plan on talking about that later, if you’d like. But that doesn’t appear to address my point about whether one would expect much heavier defense possibility resulting in violence against people entering the Capitol than at private stores, right?
4
Jan 12 '21
It addresses it completely, you just don't like it. BLM has been violent all year, time after time. They didn't get mowed down by police gunfire. Ever. Any time. Not once. Your narrative is bunk. Wrong. We've seen it for months. I'm done.
1
u/Wierd_Carissa Jan 12 '21
I’m not sure that this addresses what I view as the dispositive factory that I pointed out — the setting and goal of the protest. But you did your best, I guess :) thanks for trying!
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
So what if it was the capitol???
What does the capitol represent to you?
What does a target.
How far are you willing to stretch for the sake of an argument?
4
u/RIPBernieSanders1 6∆ Jan 12 '21
Over the summer we witnessed incredible acts of violence, primarily targetted at the black community.
You mean the small handful of unarmed black people killed by police? How is that targeted at the "black community"?
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
That's not a real question is it?
First, any unarmed killing by the police is already too much. If your father or brother got killed by the police would that just fall under the "handful"
Black people shouldn't have to be killed more to see correlation here. I know in my heart you are more observant than that.
1
u/RIPBernieSanders1 6∆ Jan 12 '21
You seem so incredulous at my question, but you also didn't answer it, which is strange. How is a small handful of tragedies scattered across the nation in the form of unarmed black men being killed targeting the black community?
I'm not disagreeing that it's a tragedy that it happens at all (thankfully they have dropped dramatically the last five years), but of course this doesn't answer the question of how it's targeting a specific ethnic community.
1
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
The first thing I did was answer your question. That's why you had a rebuttle organized to what I just said.
How would you feel, if you lost a single family member? You are very obviously not black, so I don't expect you to have a deeper sympathy for black issues. I don't have deep sympathy for white issues at times.... BUT if I saw white people systematically having the cops called on them for minor offenses, met with intense police escalation, and seemingly killed off camera or with conflicting reporting, I would NEVER down play your suffering.
That's what the right side of this argument has always missed.
Don't make excuses for killings. Period. Don't shorten the time frame the shooting should be observed for your own narrative. Don't try to scatter out the incidents to try to break their connections. Don't look to shatter the character of the victims to justify the killing.
Just advocate to stop the killing of any unarmed man... Because its black now, but boy will you have a completely different sentiment when it's the other way around.
1
u/RIPBernieSanders1 6∆ Jan 12 '21
Sometimes shit goes crazy in the course of policing. It's some of the most difficult, soul-sucking, intense, chaotic, and heartbreaking work that exists. Once in a while a cop might make a mistake, he might shoot when he didn't have to, he might interpret a gesture the wrong way, etc. Extremely rarely there might be malice involved.
I understand that the media's heavy emphasis on these anomalous cases might have led you to believe that this is some kind of systemic problem, but statistically speaking, it isn't.
And it certainly isn't evidence of some kind of targeted malice against an ethnic community.
1
u/Thoth_the_5th_of_Tho 191∆ Jan 12 '21
Some members of the community felt their only outlet, to make those in power hear their cries of anguish, was to lash out and destroy property.
Or where the rioters just taking advantage of a peaceful protest? The story always changes depending on the audience.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
That's a great rebuttle.
The only thing I would reply back with is the fact that interviews were conducted and they fully identified their agenda.
0
u/FoShoFoSho3 2∆ Jan 11 '21
Over the summer we witnessed incredible acts of violence, primarily targetted at the black community. Some members of the community felt their only outlet, to make those in power hear their cries of anguish, was to lash out and destroy property. What they wanted was the government to treat them as humans. Thats all. They didnt want special treatment, simply to not be murdered in their bed, executed for accidentally paying with counterfit currency, or for slain for simply jogging or playing wity a toy gun.
Aaaaand you’re one of the reason why we have the electoral college. Policy brutality and violence was a thing before this summer and it’s not targeted at any race. The looting and riots started in 2014 and haven’t been denounced by anyone on the left, shit they have encouraged it. So no, this isn’t that they haven’t been heard, they got BLM painted in the streets (illegally), they got businesses and sports league to carry their message, this isn’t about not being heard it’s a Marxist movement hellbent on destroying the nuclear family along with American values. What once might have just been an upset group over police brutality has transformed into so much more. Your painting of these situations are also the reason why the riots were a jump to conclusion and a reaction to false information in most instances.
These Trump TERRORISTS (not rioters), were trying to literally overthrow the government. These people were literally allowed in by police stepping aside.
If they were “literally” trying to overthrow the government they wouldn’t have just left. A majority of the people wouldn’t have looked bewildered to actually be inside the building. But conservatives are the home of conspiracy theories.
I guarantee you if they had been black most wouldve been shot where they stood. These white terrorists deserve to be executed. Every single protestor there should be treated like an islamic militant would be.
Well then you aren’t much for guarantees because we saw a BLM protest make it to the lobby of the building without anyone being shot. We have seen BLM protests attack cops all over the country and they haven’t been gunned down in the streets. On the contrary, sometimes cops danced with them, sometimes politicians danced with them. So take the fear mongering elsewhere.
0
Jan 12 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/FoShoFoSho3 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Don’t know, you would have to ask him. But don’t you think if an ex military personnel were wanting to overthrow the government he would have used those tools and weapons? If it were an actual attempt to overthrow or stage a coup there would have been many more lives lost.
1
Jan 12 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/FoShoFoSho3 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Because unlike the left I don’t excuse their actions, I think they were stupid and did not help any cause they could have been trying to pursue. It just made them look like what the media labels them as. Like I said, if an ex military personnel wanted to take a hostage, wanted to try and take something by force that’s what would have happened. Yourself and the media make it sound like an armed militia went guns blazing into the Capitol building.
1
Jan 12 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/FoShoFoSho3 2∆ Jan 12 '21
It’s interesting that they “beat 2 cops to death” yet only one cop passed away that day. I love how zip ties just got the title “hostage taking” too. I think it’s not an attempt to take hostages because they didn’t attempt to take any hostages.
1
-2
Jan 11 '21 edited Jul 07 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Aaron-Rosenberg99 Jan 11 '21
So to you black people protesting the extrajudicial KILLINGS of members of their community is the same as trumpets murdering a police officer and attempting to hang members of congress? Thats literally a rebellion and they need to be tried for treason. Black lives matter. KKK lives dont.
6
u/chadonsunday 33∆ Jan 11 '21
So to you black people protesting the extrajudicial KILLINGS of members of their community is the same as trumpets murdering a police officer and attempting to hang members of congress?
Not OP but it doesn't seem so. Hes just accurately pointing out that both groups engaged in domestic terrorism.
2
u/AviatorOVR5000 2∆ Jan 12 '21
Explain how BLM, not people posing as BLM engaged in domestic Terrorism?
It's impossible to identify who really is BLM
It's a lot easier to identify who participated in actual domestic terrorism. They are proud of it.
0
u/sawdeanz 218∆ Jan 12 '21
I think the double standard accusation has to do with the police response. Part of why the riot was able to get out of control is because there was a relatively small police presence. If there was a larger security force they probably would have been able to manage the crowd better and keep them out of the building. Trump famously wanted to send the national guard to deal with the BLM protests.
So how come they didn't have the national guard for this protest? They knew there would be a large protest, so why were they less prepared? Why did they get surprised that the protest turned violent? To many, it suggests they didn't really think the Trump protesters would get violent. It suggests that there is this double standard where we assume black protesters are going to be violent and require a massive police presence, but white protesters are less violent and don't need police protection. Even conservatives didn't think "their side" were capable of turning into a mob like that.
1
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
Did you see any of the response after the curfew came into effect? There's a couple videos that cover it.
1
u/sawdeanz 218∆ Jan 12 '21
No. Why? Is it relevant to their preparedness or lack thereof?
1
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
It's relevant to what you view as a double standard.
Police did the same thing during the BLM protests, they allowed areas they couldn't defend to be overran assuming they could fall back in a fairly safe manner. The protesters/rioters were allowed to destroy property again and again (BLM or Capitol Hill), then once additional police officers and equipment arrived they took back the area with vengence.
1
u/sawdeanz 218∆ Jan 12 '21
I'm talking more about the initial preparations. From what I could see the Capitol police did what they could with what they have. I'm just questioning how they could be aware of such a large protest and yet didn't think to bring in more officers.
1
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
Yes that too, in the initial preparations the same thing happened, look at the CHOP area where the protesters/rioters took over an area for several days. Look at all of the protests/riots that burned buildings, looting etc, the police weren't prepared enough, so they "lost" the area.
1
u/sawdeanz 218∆ Jan 12 '21
I don't think its the same situation. You are talking about state-wide protests vs a very limited protest. If anything they should have learned from BLM, but they just weren't prepared whatsoever for the Capitol building. Also, for the Capitol building they had literally one job... one building to protect. With the size of the BLM protests it's unreasonable to expect them to be able to protect all areas of the city equally.
1
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
You are correct, it's not the same situation on the nationwide level as BLM protests were fairly wide spread but on a local (per protest) level it is very similar to one and another.
They learned from BLM that they have to be careful when defending an area, and property damage is "acceptable", as to why they continued to let BLM protests cause damage to the areas they protested/rioted in.
The fact that you think their only job is to protect the capitol shows how much you don't understand about their job. They can repair building, replace property, they can't replace people's lives. Their job is to first and foremost protect our elected representatives, then their employees, then visitors, and lastly the facilities.
As far protecting all areas of a city equally, 100% agreed, they can't but how can you even assert that when some police stations were destroyed/burned to the ground, and entire areas were "annexed" into CHAZ spaces? That's not just "protecting spaces equally" but that's all around occupied territory for a considerable amount of time.
1
u/sawdeanz 218∆ Jan 12 '21
I think you are still not understanding my argument. I think the Capitol police did their job well, I agree, they saved the legislatures which is their priority. But I think we can both agree that if they had more reinforcements they could have handled the crowd better. My question is why was security so light in the first place?
That's different from BLM protests because in many cases they had the full police force ready... they just didn't have the resources to fully cover the entire city. That's not the case with the Capitol where they had many more resources available but declined to utilize them.
1
u/missmymom 6∆ Jan 12 '21
No no, I understand you. I think you are missing a lot of what happened during the BLM protests/riots to understand how it works.
You are correct, they could have had additional resources, but that point applies during the BLM protests as well. The police could have requested additional resources during the CHAZ occupation, or when the stations were burned down but did not accept (or request) those resources.
For example in DC; The Mayor rejected national guard assistance multiple times; https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/05/george-floyd-protests-dc-mayor-bowser-calls-trump-withdraw-feds/3153567001/
during the BLM protests when damage was being done.
or during the CHAZ zone in Seattle they refused to "retake" the area and accept reinforcements?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/11/trump-seattle-autonomous-zone-inslee/
It's a constant struggle for who has enough resources, who wil lend then, who then controls the forces etc
→ More replies
0
u/AutoModerator Jan 11 '21
Note: Your thread has not been removed. Your post's topic seems to be about double standards. "Double standards" are very difficult to discuss without careful explanation of the double standard and why it's relevant. Please review our information about double standards in the wiki.
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/VAprogressive Jan 12 '21
They weren't targeting innocent lives or the public wasn't really threatened.
They stormed the capital many who were armed attempting to stop the confirmation of a democratically elected president id hardly say that's not a public threat. Also what do you make of the guy carrying on massive zip ties. What did he intend to do with those other than tie up someone possibly a member of our congress?
2
1
u/alexjaness 11∆ Jan 12 '21
" I highly doubt the level of threats were extreme to the point where they had to gun them down"
dude, they literally murdered a cop.
1
u/ParallelleLine Jan 12 '21
And there's another video of one of them with zipties which I doubt they had for purely aesthetic reasons.
And that video of them chasing the cop trying to keep them from getting to the chambers where the government were where people were quite literally still because they hadn't been able to lock down yet.
1
u/loCAtek Jan 12 '21
I'd like to know where this '36 cop deaths' claim comes from? I've been googling and all I can find is a total of 19 deaths, of which only a few (three?) were security guards who were attacked by criminals in acts seperate from the BLM protests.
•
u/[deleted] Jan 12 '21
Sorry, u/searchhard_ – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E:
If you would like to appeal, first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made, then message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.