CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE MIKE BROWN/ERIC GARNER/ETC SITUATION?

author=suzy_cheesedreams
snip

Goodness, you're obsessed with me. Give it a rest, sparky.

author=Max McGee
Would you agree that selective prosecution and enforcement of arbitrarily criminalized marijuana (which is a total bullshit law in the first place because pot is less harmful than alcohol) is used as a tool of the establishment to keep generations of young black and brown men behind bars for most of their lives?

Well I don't want to go full on conspiracy mode, but I would agree that that is what ends up happening, yes. I'm a pretty staunch libertarian as far as this issue goes.

author=Link_2112
Thanks Feld. Great topic :/

It's certainly loaded. I had actually hoped this topic wouldn't come up on this site. That said, I knew if it did, it was an important one to discuss. I said my piece and now I'm just here for the comments.

I think these topics are important, I don't see why they shouldn't come up - though I understand that some people simply don't want to discuss these sorts of things.

author=Max McGee
I think the discussion here has been mostly productive if not always totally chummy.

Speaking as an outside who checked in on the thread every half a page or so to get the New tag to disappear, sure seems like a lot of personal insults were getting thrown around. That doesn't look like a debate discussion to me. (Mistyped.)

author=Max McGee
Would you agree that selective prosecution and enforcement of arbitrarily criminalized marijuana (which is a total bullshit law in the first place because pot is less harmful than alcohol) is used as a tool of the establishment to keep generations of young black and brown men behind bars for most of their lives?

To be fair, that's not the only reason.

Yeah, Max, our prison system is corporate. They complain if there aren't enough people in prison. Our government manufactures arbitrary laws for the express purpose of criminalizing people. Marijuana is just one very small cog in that system, but society is waking up. States are bucking the federal position. It was a major slap in the face to our federal government when marijuana was legalized in Washington D. C.

It's sign of the coming end of the prohibition on drugs. This also happened during the alcohol Prohibition of the 30s. When states started defying Prohibition, it ended soon after.

Edit: Finally found a story I've been looking for. Here is the story of a man who was coming home to his apartment with his girlfriend, and was killed the instant a cop saw him. He had no criminal record, nothing was found on him and as he lay dying, the cop didn't even call for help. If it's taking this long for the department to decide whether or not he will be charged, then rest assured he won't be charged.

Edit 2: Here's a lovely one I found. I love how there's no looting in cities like Nashville where the police are actually helping and joining protesters, but here in St. Louis, we have lovely videos like this.

author=Liberty
Quite frankly I am sick of you, Max, and others pulling out the SJW tag to slap on anyone you don't agree with--

There are quite a few people I disagree that AREN'T in fact SJWs. Actually, almost ALL of the people I disagree with aren't SJWs. Just for one example from this thread: harmonic is not an SJW. He's just a Republican "Libertarian". (harmonic: I am teasing).

author=Liberty
as though it's an insult.

AS THOUGH it's an insult? Seriously? Social Justice Warriors are practically by definition abhorrent self righteous douchenozzles. Please do understand that I am not remotely interested in expanding the label of "Social Justice Warrior" to include anyone who cares about racism, intolerance, and injustice. If that was it's definition, then I would be a Social Justice Warrior.

But SJW has a very specific definition. A member of the PC police out to avenge thoughtcrimes on the internet with screaming outrage. I agree that SJW is a shitty thing to label any reasonable person i.e. anyone who is not an SJW, but sometimes it is entirely necessary to call a spade a spade.

For obvious reasons I am not going to like...spell out who here is and is not a SJW (if you're reading this and you have any doubt about it at all, then I almost certainly don't consider you one)...but I think you get what I mean nonetheless.

You know, I admit that it was incorrect, even unfair, of me to infer that suzy_cheesedreams was an SJW based on her position. But I was at the moment very frustrated to see the position I was being conflated with the position harmonic was taking when they were, from my perspective, very far apart. But in any case certainly it was not more inflammatory than calling her a "jerk".

tl;dr I will certainly not label anyone/everyone I disagree with an SJW, but when someone says something as inflammatory and belligerently wrong as "racism against white people literally doesn't even exist" (a conversation we are now thankfully done with, everyone having agreed that it does in fact exist) that person is clearly an SJW and should be called out as such.

author=Liberty
Next time I see anyone use that tag aimed at someone there will be warnings. Seriously.

You lot keep using it as an insult so I am now going to take calling someone a SJW as a personal insult and reacting as such.

You have all been warned.

Cut that shit out.

I'm honestly not looking to poke the bear here, but to be frank, I don't feel like this kind of heavy handed threat is appropriate or correct and please don't take this the wrong way but honestly I believe you are better than this kind of stuff. I am positive that RMN is better than this kind of stuff. RMN is not one of those internet shithole echo chambers where there is a "right" and a "wrong" opinion and I'd hate to see it become one.

***

With that said I certainly don't foresee a problem in this thread going forward. I don't think there is all that much to disagree about here. Police brutality is horrifying. The racial dimension of it is horrifying. The virtually universal lack of indictments or any real consequences for the officers involved is horrifying. To all of us, I'm sure.

It's about using it as a personal insult which Max and other people have been doing as a way to insult people without being told to knock that shit off. Frankly, sick of it. Stop bringing it up in every controversial discussion we have on the site. I'm taking it to mean that you're calling people fucktards and as such if you call someone that again as an insult, you will be warned.

...SJW is just an identifier. How you choose to interpret its meaning is up to you. I mean, talk about a heavy-handed solution, to censor something so incredibly widely used across the internet.

I mean, if SJW suddenly becomes a curse word, people will think of a new identifier. Then even that will be censored eventually.

Wait, since when did it originate as a pejorative? It might have kinda sorta evolved into one (...news to me?), but it originated as what they called themselves, I was almost sure. Because, you know, if you consider yourself to be someone who tries to fight for the justice of people who are socially downtrodden, that's not a bad thing. That's just another word for a democrat. There are people who take it too far, just like there are people who take any ideology too far, of course, but they're perverting the term.

I don't think anyone was really using it as an "insult," just as a name for a group of people whose (perceived?) ideology they find repulsive. I will agree that arguing that someone's core political and social ideologies are evil is an absolutely pointless and infuriating endeavor in almost any setting, unless you're preaching from the pulpit of a church.