Defunding Police

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:48 pm

2. I have never understood racism. I do not mean I do not know what it is or how it is manifest, I mean I cannot even imagine what goes on in the mind of someone who is racist. I have long believed one of the worst aspects of racism is the irrational separation of individuals according to some people's view of difference. Except for that false separation, so-called inter-racial marriage would have prevailed and today there would be no way to differentiate individuals by means of superficial genetic differences.

We are all intermixing due to mass travel - Blacks in America are on average 2/3 black.

Maybe I'll do my part - if me and my girlfriend last - and make some mixed babies.


RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:48 pm If everyone were a mongrel, like me, racial prejudice would be impossible. Human beings, being predominantly idiots, would find other things to base their irrational prejudices on, but at least racism would be eliminated.
exactly, like that overatted movie Children of Men(I didn;t like it over - in fact only liked the one 2 min part) - the part where the first baby is born in the building and all the soldiers stop shooting hearing the baby cry................the go back to shooting.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2020 6:41 pm
Gary Childress wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2020 3:56 am
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:20 am There's a reason for the change but it's unlikely what you would believe it is, but I cannot go into it now. So I just have one comment about this:

So, what are the police doing. Obviously they aren't stopping the crime. Do you own a gun, Gary? (Please do not answer that question here. No one else needs to know.) If you wait for the police to protect you or your property, it's not going to happen. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away, and if you call them, I guarantee you will be sorry. You have no idea how much trouble they can make for you no matter how innocent you are, especially if you call them during their coffee break.
I'm curious about what the reason is for how our society is today so I'll wait for your response on that before posting further in our conversation.
I'm afraid I have given you a very wrong impression of the city in which I grew up. I'll just add that it was hardly a country town. It was a major industrial city, Peabody, Massachusetts, culturally varied and very sophisticated, with many millionaires and a very large laboring middle class. It was named for America's most famous philanthropist of the time, George Peabody.

I wrote a long series of fourteen articles around 2007 entitled, "Marxist Revolution of the West" which explored the entire question of the demise of Western civilization, and that was not a complete explanation. I can hardly explain the loss of civilized culture in a couple of paragraphs.

I will say this, the level of civilization of any society is determined entirely by the level of integrity of the individuals that make up that society. The difference in the highly civilized nature of the culture of the city I grew up in between the forties and fifties and what that society (and most societies of today) is the kind individuals that made up those societies. Any society is whatever the individuals that make up that society are, so, what changed is the kind of people who populated the city of my youth, and the kind of people who populate the world today.

From the third article in the series I mentioned, "Characteristics of Civilized People," I described the kind of people I grew up surrounded by. I named six specific characteristics: Independence, Ambition, Courteousy, Decency, and Privacy, and I explained them.

So briefly:

If there was one characteristic that distinguished people of the fifties from people of today, it was their independence. Self-sufficiency, self-reliance, and competence were virtues individuals pursued in their own lives and admired in others. ... They recognized a person's life is their own to be lived as they chose, but that the individual was responsible for that life, both to support it and to bear the consequences of how it was lived.

Not being able to "stand on one's own two feet" and to support one's self and one's family was considered a disgrace. Though people in the 50s were incredibly generous and would leap to help someone whom circumstances had knocked down through no fault of their own, most would do anything rather than take someone else's help, and would work to get themselves back on their own feet and to repay anyone who had helped them.

Their lives were marked by ambition, and an almost insatiable desire to accomplish things, from improving their work to improving their homes to improving their minds, they were always doing something productive.

The word polite has the same root as polished and one definition of polite is civilized. "Please," "Thank you," and "excuse me," salt and peppered everyone's conversation in the 50s. Children were taught, "manners," and were required to be courteous, which included never addressing an adult by their first name, saying "yes, Sir," and "no, Ma'am," and making requests in the form, "may I please ...?"

Courtesy is not conforming to social convention and not a limit to free speech. It is the conscious recognition of the dignity and privacy of others, an affirmation of their personhood and their value as individual human beings. Those who have not lived in a courteous age seem to have the impression it was stiff and formal and in some way restricting, but in fact, it was the opposite. Common courtesy made social relationships much easier because people knew the appropriate way to interact and deal with one another and the words appropriate to polite conversation came to the lips of the well-mannered with all the ease and naturalness with which the vilest profanities fill the mouths of today's ignorant and ill-mannered louts.

That nowadays rare word, "decency," is often associated with sexual behavior or dress, but its meaning, as applied to the people of the fifties, is much broader than that. It's meaning has to do with another word rarely used these days, "propriety," which, like courtesy, is mistaken for some kind of social conformity, but in fact means that which is appropriate to human beings, that is, to civilized human beings. Civilized human beings do not eat with their hands or perform certain bodily functions in public, for example.

The decency of the fifties came from a sense, if not explicitly than implicitly, of what was proper to beings who have grasped the importance and necessity of principles and values—principles by which one understands the purpose and meaning of life; values by which one descerns the difference between the vices that are a waste of that life and the virtues by which it is lived successfully and happily. This was the source of the vitality that dominated the fifties, the belief that life is worth living and living well, because there are things worth living for, things with real meaning and importance, things one can love and give themselves to totally, things one can hold sacred and revere. The view of life in the 50s was one of infinite possibilities in a world where anything could be achieved by anyone willing to make the effort, and the certainty that a life of such potential was worth taking seriously.

Privacy is the hallmark of a civilized society. One gauge of the level of civilization in any society is the degree of individual privacy chosen and enjoyed by it's citizens.

It is difficult to imagine, if one has not experienced it, what that sense of privacy that dominated the 50s was like. People were jealous of their privacy which they regarded a recognition of one's own being as an independent individual. To have one's own privacy violated or to violate another's was tantamount to physical assault. One's thoughts, one's body, one's business were their own, to be shared or not by their own choice. People minded their own business, and expected others to mind theirs—it was part of their decency. A person's private affairs were just that; intimacy had a real meaning and had to be earned; one only shared the most private aspects of their life with those whom they loved and who had earned it.

The regard people had for other's privacy came from a profound respect for other's integrity and individuality, the unquestioned sense that others owned their lives, as one owned their own.

Those are some of the things that were different between the people of the fifties and the people of today. I might have mentioned honesty, personal integrity, and a high sense of what was really important and what was not. I know you'll want to know why people are different today, but I cannot tell you. I know others who have those values today, although there are fewer and fewer of them every day. People choose what they are. You'll have to ask them why they have chosen to be what I regard as subhuman.
AMEN!
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

Gloominary wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 11:23 pm The liberal elite use to talk about racial, sexual and gender equality in terms of economics, but it's gone beyond that now.
They believe minorities and women are less physically safe and secure than the white majority and men due solely to racism and sexism, not at all due to black and some brown people's propensity for violence.
Not only do they want to make things safer (as if arresting fewer black and brown thugs will make anyone safer) for minorities and women, but they are willing to sacrifice the safety of men and the majority to achieve parity.

How do we feel about that?
Are you willing to sacrifice your (family's) safety to achieve absolute parity (the unachievable)?
So in other words, there's no such thing as black and brown on white hate crimes and racism?
Defund the police, white neighborhoods don't deserve safety until all neighborhoods are equally safe?
Racial quotas for police officers, arrestees, prison officers and prisoners?
No justice, no peace (sanctioned riots)?

Believe all women, what's next, believe all black and brown people?
Reintroduce segregation, all black and brown judges, jurors and prosecutors for black and brown defendants, I mean that's what these black and brown movements openly funded by Soros call for.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/13/us/p ... tions.html


not at all due to black and some brown people's propensity for violence.


Nice, I love it!

thanks for taking off your white sheet, i appreciate your honesty.

Richard Spencer has a meeting downt he street, you are late for it.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

Gloominary wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:18 am
In the broadest sense of the word, a progressive is someone who wants to change society, government and economics in largely unprecedented ways, for what they believe is the better.
Its antonym is the conservative, who wants to keep things as is, or resurrect some real, or imagined golden age, albeit updated/graded.
In a narrower sense of the word, a progressive is a social democrat/technocrat, an environmentalist, a germaphobe, anti-gun, who practices leftwing identity politics (anti (or reverse) ageism, ableism, ethnocentrism, nationalism, racism, religionism, sexism and so on), who believes in gradualism, incrementalism rather than ultraviolent revolution.
Progressivism is basically socialism or communism-lite, whereas conservatism is fascism or Nazism-lite.
Yea, and then there's classical liberalism and libertarianism on the one hand, and left or rightwing authoritarianism and totalitarianism on the other, anarchism and statism, and so on.
Right, dems tend to be progressive, republicans conservative, or libertarian.
good definitions. on point.

BTW the left was Libertrian during W rule, due to the Patriot Act and Iraqnam. I was and still am a Left Libertarian.

for some reason now that Iraqnam is forgotten, the Libertarians seemed to have moved toward the teabagger right nutters and left the Democrat's side.

not sure why, but they have - mostly (myself excluded).
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Veg

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:22 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:44 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:24 pm You think for yourself? You, who calls anyone you don't agree with a 'commie'?
I think you are making a mistake. You may go through anything I've written, here or anywhere else (I'll be glad to provide a link to a few hundred articles and millions of words you can check out) where I have never used the word, "commie," or ever used the word, "communist," to describe anyone. Why would I do a thing like that. I don't mind people disagreeing with me. You disagree with me all the time, but I still love you!
I'm the one who calls everyone commie (cuz they are), not RC.

RC is a good egg; me, I'm the old stinker.
agreed ;-)
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:25 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 6:21 pm
henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:45 pm

I don't think it's all that sinister: we, in context, probably just refers to we here in-forum.
Perhaps, but I didn't get that from the context which was, "Do we have to keep importing this American nonsense into our politics. We did all this in the 80s and 90s the States are so backward." That doesn't seem to be referring to the forum, does it?

It's definitely not worth arguing, though. We can just see it differently and the drinks are on me.
You buyin'? Well Hell! Beer, beer, beer, & more beer!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Köstritzer

yummy.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

commonsense wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 1:38 am
Gloominary wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 11:23 pm The liberal elite use to talk about racial, sexual and gender equality in terms of economics, but it's gone beyond that now.
They believe minorities and women are less physically safe and secure than the white majority and men due solely to racism and sexism, not at all due to black and some brown people's propensity for violence.
Not only do they want to make things safer (as if arresting fewer black and brown thugs will make anyone safer) for minorities and women, but they are willing to sacrifice the safety of men and the majority to achieve parity.

How do we feel about that?
Are you willing to sacrifice your (family's) safety to achieve absolute parity (the unachievable)?
So in other words, there's no such thing as black and brown on white hate crimes and racism?
Defund the police, white neighborhoods don't deserve safety until all neighborhoods are equally safe?
Racial quotas for police officers, arrestees, prison officers and prisoners?
No justice, no peace (sanctioned riots)?

Believe all women, what's next, believe all black and brown people?
Reintroduce segregation, all black and brown judges, jurors and prosecutors for black and brown defendants, I mean that's what these black and brown movements openly funded by Soros call for.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/13/us/p ... tions.html
What a crock. You’ve just side-stepped the central issue, which is that white police are murdering blacks at a disproportionately high rate.
and black police.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 1:20 pm You’ve just side-stepped the central issue, which is that white police are murdering blacks at a disproportionately high rate.

What about blacks killin' blacks?

Everyone gets their panties in a twist over white debbil cops killin' blacks; nobody sez boo about blacks killin' blacks.

A dick kneels on a scumbag's throat and the center does not hold; hundreds of black men, women, and children get shot and killed and that's just business as usual.

What gives?
because Cop are Representatives of The State, and so have a higher legal standard than Joe Shmo citizen. Like a Soldier - also a rep of The State, must conduct his killing legally, ROI, not shoot kids or unarmed ladies/etc.

and you are right Black Joe Blows are killing way more other Black Joew Blows than white Joe Blows.

----------

but that is not the issue, they are not COPS, not The State.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 1:20 pm

A dick kneels on a scumbag's throat and the center does not hold; hundreds of black men, women, and children get shot and killed and that's just business as usual.

What gives?
That Dick was in a uniform identifiing him as a State Actor, member of the Government Minisoda.

if that Dick just was wearing a t-shirt and some bling-bling, it would have been on page 98 for 1/2 a day.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

Impenitent wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:10 pm
commonsense wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 2:32 pm The issue is not blacks killing blacks.
then you think black lives don't really matter, do they?

-Imp
the argument is the conduct of Government Representatives, not the conduct of civilians.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:19 pm
commonsense wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 2:32 pm The issue is not blacks killing blacks.
yes, let's all comment on the gopher hole and ignore the sinkhole
yes lets, since COP represent The State, and civilians do not!
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Defunding Police

Post by gaffo »

commonsense wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 4:07 pm Maybe the gopher hole is possible to repair while the sinkhole will take much more effort.

Maybe it’s a matter of percentages of each race who are killed. That would speak to probability of being killed more so than a comparison of raw numbers.

Maybe a million times more white crackers are being killed than blacks. Killing blacks is wrong. Killing whites is wrong.

And it is sad that killing whites received no attention at all, as if it was acceptable, until killing blacks became an issue.
why did you use a racism slur for whites? Im white and do not like to be refered to as a Cracker any more than a black would be called a n*****.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re:

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:26 pm you really wanna put the kibosh on out of control cops?

make 'em liable, civilly & criminally, for their misdeeds just as I, a private citizen, am

strip away immunities and extraordinary protections

watch how good cops become when they have no buffer


and while your at it...

have elected folks abide by the laws they pass

strip away their exemptions

watch laws become sensible and minimal when lawmakers have to walk the same road as us lil people


and, since we're reachin' for the pie up there in the sky...

end all entitlements except for a narrow, sharply defined, limited assist for those who actually need a hand up

do that and watch black on black crime drop


more...

decriminalize drugs

free men and women ought to be able to eat, drink, smoke, snort, or inject whatever they like and bear the consequences fully

do that: you break the back of organized crime, remove an incentive for tribal behavior, and -- without even tryin' -- cut the budget of any law enforcement significantly


some more...

encourage responsible gun ownership among law abiders

see communism for the cancer it is

encourage free enterprise

reinvigorate the notion of mind your business, keep your hands to yourself, or else

recognize identity politics as the crapsack it is

encourage idiosyncrasy among the states (within the broad boundaries of Life, Liberty, Property)


there's more, but mebbe you get the idea (freedom [self-direction & self- responsibility] is the answer to all the woes)
yep remove qualifeid fucking immunity - go take the cops pension away too while your at it.

take away their military toys too.
gaffo
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Re:

Post by gaffo »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:55 pm
Lacewing wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:10 pm
commonsense wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 6:29 pm

All this would be wonderful.
Sounds good to me too!
it should sound wonderful to everyone

so: why don't we have any of it?
Police Union, Hiring former vet for occupation rather protection - the rot is all the way to the top.
Gary Childress
Posts: 2215
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: The Domain of Confusion

Re: Defunding Police

Post by Gary Childress »

gaffo wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:10 am
I'm all for defunding the police (not abolishing) - tighten the purse strings and maybe they will make batter hiring choices, and train to PROTECT AND SERVE ME - rather than hiring former Irqnam vets with PTSD who only thing to OCCUPY AND SIEGE ME.

so ya fuck the cops, they have the wrong mentality - go back to the older days of PROTECT AND SERVE - pigs all to me until they learn the old school mentality - pre Iraqnam vet hiring days.
But, according to some, paying people less to be police officers should result in poorer quality people applying for the job. If you want quality police officers (or so the theory goes) you should pay well. On the other hand, I suppose perhaps paying more also lures more people who are only interested in good pay and not as interested in serving the community. I don't know.
Post Reply