BF2S Forums Race relations thread

Black Woman Says She Was Naked And On Her Period When California Deputies Arrested Her In Her Front Yard
https://blavity.com/black-woman-says-sh … gory1=news

embedded tweet wrote:

#ICYMI Black woman in #Lancaster forced outside naked while on period by #LACounty sheriffs.  Deputies claim they had a warrant for her brother--but he was already in custody in #SouthLA. They also made her 13 y/o sister go outside w/out a shirt on. #LASD #BlackWomen

Naked and Bleeding: One Woman’s Story of What Happened When the Sheriff’s Came Through Her Front Door
https://medium.com/@jcannick/naked-and- … 291d06ac42

Jane Doe says that her dropping to the ground was viewed as resisting by the deputies, so they flipped her over and forced onto her stomach. A group of deputies came and jumped on top of her, touching her breasts and private areas in the process. She says deputies also retaliated against her for telling her son and sister not to talk to them.

[...]

To add insult to injury, Jane Doe was arrested and charged with three counts of resisting arrest.

She says a detective gave her an ultimatum at the Lancaster sheriff’s station — either sign a document agreeing that she was illegally recording the deputies in her house and that they can have a copy of the recording or get maced.

Weighing the consequences of being maced while being handcuffed, Jane Doe chose to sign the paperwork.

When she was given her phone back, most of the video she had captured at the beginning of the incident was missing. The video was edited to just capture deputies throwing the blanket over her head.

On top of that, she was never given a copy of the documents she was forced to sign under duress.

I've been called unreasonable on this forum for asking Hollis for his insight on police activity. I suppose I would be unreasonable here too. But if he was still posting, I wouldn't expect anything much further beyond "I don't have all the evidence on hand, so they were probably the spitting image of grace and professionalism and that she was probably being entitled, obnoxious, and ungrateful."

“My son remembers that day. Even though’s he was five-year-old, he will never forget it. He told me, “Mama, I remember they pointed their guns at me, and I thought I was going to die.”

I think the qanon wikipedia page has a picture of a swat guy with a qanon patch.

Also,

'Disturbing' texts between Oregon police and far-right group prompt investigation
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/di … on-n972161

Could dig up links to connections between cops, cop bosses, and far-right/alt-right all day.

Bizarre sort of chemistry, considering plenty in the latter group hate police.

'widely used'? both of these terms trace back to 2015. it's part of the same culture war and the divisions were drawn very quickly.



perhaps 'your reading' isn't indexed by google? i guess there is a whole lot of 'the literatoor' that takes place in angry newspaper comment sections, and on facebook.

you know, all you've done on this forum for about a week is make wildly inaccurate, plainly ignorant statements. it's not hard for you to even do the most cursory research. 'graffiti has not been a tolerated feature of society since ancient rome'.

you're so wrong on these things, and so stubborn, that it's almost impressive. and, just think, it's so easy to actually correct your ignorance: all you have to do is shut the fuck up for once in your life and listen to someone else's experience, complaints other than your own.

Slavery did end 150 years ago, how much longer is this going to be an issue?

isn't it rather the institution of the police, with their long entwined history with the institution of slavery, which has to work to not make it an issue anymore? or is it the african-americans' fault who get kneeled on, and thrown into the ground and made to fear for their lives at routine traffic stops? which group here has unreconstructed values from the slavery era? which group hasn't 'moved on' in their attitudes?

Last edited by uziq (2020-07-18 01:03:03)

it's google's ngram, which indexes all mentions of a term, which i clipped in 15 secs. i hardly need to adjust the timeline and smoothing of the results to make the simple fucking point. good job, pedant. maybe if i trimmed the imgur grab before uploading it, it would have made a more unassailable argument?

ancient civilizations aren't 'precious' to me. it tends to be right-wing types like yourself (or, at any rate, cultural conservatives) who truss them up as some 'golden age' from whence the decline narratives perilously fall. i certainly don't think ancient rome was any sort of civic ideal. but you making out that 'graffiti' came along with the 'barbarians' is stupid and illiterate. english people have graffiti'd their environment for the entire history of these islands.

it is common knowledge - er, you can read the inscriptions - that the graffiti seen in roman cities was done by romans, i.e. citizens. do you even know what that category entails?

it really is something watching you insult 'history grad students' on the one hand and make the most silly, fundamental, sub-schoolboy historical errors on the other. you are textbook ignorant. i feel sorry for you. a little bit of reading, patient learning, the will to understand, etc, could solve a lot of your negativity, frustration, and fear.

Last edited by uziq (2020-07-18 03:47:38)

dilbert thinks human society is one formula or computer model away from being solved, for good. and he thinks that engineers (such as himself, who has no toxic ideology or irrationalism or blindspots whatsoever) are to be the benign and benevolent overseers of such a society. ran on strictly rational, calculated terms, of course. logical. because society is a computer, basically, or a machine, or, er, well everything is reducible to data points and information at any rate.

we can learn nothing from history because dilbert's expert technocracy will be governed by iron and immutable laws. just like life itself, you see. history is contingent but dilbert is apodictic. he barely needs to trouble himself with arbitration and nuancing between positions. dilbert's outlook is a priori. with his deep and extensive knowledge of everything he can perceive the universal. what do you mean jews weren't from egypt? what does that have to do with israel, anyway? go away with your historical facts! i am an engineer!!! i solve problems!!!

Honestly dilbert, you have one of the most brattish, cherry-picked, and narrow views of history and its study that I've ever had the misfortune to hear.

What about all the Nazi scientists and doctors? Oh crud, better not listen to anyone from STEM and med school.

Why did Nazi doctors break their 'hippocratic' oaths?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl … 4-0065.pdf

You are such a victim.

Dilbert_X wrote:

So on the one hand you think everyone should do what technocratic experts like Fauci tells them, on the other you think technocrats are fascists and morons and countries should be run by history and literature graduates because you're one based on their stellar track records.

That and the world shouldn't be run according to democratic principles and basic human rights, it should be directed according to millenia-old fairy stories and what in-bred cultists want.


Glad you've made that all very clear, thanks.

nope, never said any of that. ‘thanks’.

i pointed out, as is clear for everyone to see here, dipshit, that your ‘technocratic’ governance is ITSELF a contingent, historical set of beliefs, that what you treat as ‘objective’ political rule is just another set of assumptions associated with your own historical present; and alluded to the fact that technocrats, engineers and ‘experts’ with politics such as your own have taken society off a cliff several times in the 20th century. the number of technocratic elites who have taken their societies into inhuman atrocities, factory-line murder, eugenics, mass-scale famine and failures of central planning, etc. is very long.

science does not give us a political guidebook. it has very little crossover with politics, which involves ethics and history as much as ‘iron laws’. what you promote is in fact scienTISM, a sort of weak-piss politics with scientific-sounding flim-flam but which really masks and justifies your own political outlook. well that isn’t everyone’s political outlook, and you saying, ‘it’s the experts, stupid’ or ‘it’s engineering, duh’ doesn’t convince anyone. people of your ilk have been trying to appropriate ‘expertise’, ‘benign technocracy’, ‘reasonable thinking’, and, of course, ‘common sense’ for as long as politics itself. it’s a form of rhetoric and a discourse in itself.

i do believe in experience and expertise. fauci is an expert and i listen to what he has to say on disease spreads and epidemiology. when he starts pronouncing on the merits of history degrees or talking about african-americans' right to protest, then i know i’m dealing with an ideologue and not an ‘expert’. somehow i doubt that’ll happen, because he’s an educated and intelligent man, which involves recognizing the expertise of others; that’s probably why he’s had a successful public career and you’re living at home making nonsense-statements about subjects you know zilch about. i wonder if fauci has any hot takes about roman street art?

your view of history, like most of the world, really, is that of an intellectual cripple. it’s like you can’t contain several complex and nuanced ideas at once. ‘england has a ruling class that produces mediocre public schoolboys who quote latin and govern for their mates’ MUST equal ‘everyone who has the same degree as them is a danger to society’. wow amazing logic. such reasoning!

read a fucking book.

Last edited by uziq (2020-07-19 02:47:01)

but in many aspects of governance, knowledge of history IS expertise.

who is this mythical person who has 'basic grounding in many things'. do you mean an engineer in his garden shed? your dad, with his knowledge of wisden's cricket guide and fishing knots? why can't a person with a good education also have grounding in many things? it's just such a specious idea, this 'technocracy' you advocate for. 'people with commonsense and real-world experience'. you mean like trump? how about alan sugar? should we hand over the government to a guy who built a computer company? is your vision of technocratic government basically 'dragon's den', dilbert?

the last 20 years? tony blair didn't go to eton. neither did gordon brown (not oxbridge either). neither did theresa may. john major and thatcher before that were 'technocratic' grammar school types; one didn't even go to university, and the other had a science degree.

who is leading the UK off the cliff of brexit? nigel farage and co.? not a bunch of oxbridge etonians. funded, in fact, by nouveau riche thatcherite wankers like arron banks. entrepreneurs and private sector experts, no? who funded the anti-EU populist parties for the last 20-30 years? a bunch of city bankers, merchants, and ideologues? alan sked?

how about the role of the tabloid media in all of this? they have had just as much of an influence over electoral politics as the no. 10 executives they're in cahoots with. murdoch has had a much bigger impact on british political life than anyone with an oxferd english degree. do you really think a tiny mandarin elite of toffs have so much control?

it's almost like you have some irrational obsession and talk absolute claptrap.

Last edited by uziq (2020-07-19 03:26:42)

the above really isn't true, considering in america it's invoked all the time over the civil war/slavery era, and still happens today over legacies of figures like ataturk in turkey, for instance. or how about the reckoning with the past endured by russians over stalin? germany and its post-war past? china and mao? cambodia/vietnam today? it's not like historiography is silent on reappraising the morals of antecedents outside of the european-colonial context.

what does seem to be present in many european contexts, which doesn't still obtain in germany w/r/t ww2, for instance, is that we've kept up monuments and statues to these people, where in other countries they were silently taken down or thrown away in uprisings years ago. it's really not some 'oh, the poor white european is being exclusively picked on' situation.

we readily criticize, for instance, serbs not teaching the 'truth' of srebrenica and who still put up murals and name streets after mladic and co. we criticize and furrow our brow at japan not teaching the 'truth' of their actions in ww2, and tut-tut at them for not taking responsibility for their imperial atrocities and crimes. but how many british schoolchildren are taught about famines in india? camps in africa? the answer is none. we do not reckon with these parts of our past; the dominant ideology, of 'the empire was a jolly old adventure!' is still the one in the culture.

Last edited by uziq (2020-07-19 03:41:06)

Larssen wrote:

how the wealth, riches and comfort in the west are ultimately the result of those expeditions and conquests.

It would be interesting to know if that were really true.
I bet the industrial age eclipsed that by many orders of magnitude.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'd say someone with a good grounding in Maths and Statistics and reasonable knowledge of science would be in a much better position to get a grip on most things than someone who can precis poetry, read latin or tell you what Attila the Hun got up to.

Sounds like bunk to me.

If a cellular biology PhD started bragging about how he could run the country by virtue of science, I'd be a little skeptical. A number of scientists aren't very confident spouting off about something outside their expertise without at least the "I'm no expert, outside my field, correct me if I'm wrong, etc." disclaimer, if they comment at all.

I would be extremely skeptical of an 'algebra' teacher running for city council on the grounds that his subject made him more qualified than his 'local history' colleague.

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

the above really isn't true, considering in america it's invoked all the time over the civil war/slavery era, and still happens today over legacies of figures like ataturk in turkey, for instance. or how about the reckoning with the past endured by russians over stalin? germany and its post-war past? china and mao? cambodia/vietnam today? it's not like historiography is silent on reappraising the morals of antecedents outside of the european-colonial context.

what does seem to be present in many european contexts, which doesn't still obtain in germany w/r/t ww2, for instance, is that we've kept up monuments and statues to these people, where in other countries they were silently taken down or thrown away in uprisings years ago. it's really not some 'oh, the poor white european is being exclusively picked on' situation.

Mao is still a national hero in China and has his face plastered everywhere. Most russians will compassionately tell you how Stalin was the right man for the job and the excesses a necessary sacrifice. Ataturk, well, modern Turkey kinda rejects his western preference. But I was specifically talking about reappraisals in the west wrt western history, today almost exclusively centred on colonial figures. Who are of course white.

why is that some particular problem? most western european countries have not reckoned with their imperial past./

yes, stalin might be back in favour now in russia, but they had decades of self-questioning, the 'secret' of the soviets was out, glasnost/perestroika, etc. they went through that process. many western countries never have. the schoolchildren are still not told the 'truth' of empire and the national past is still some rosy story of adventure and glory.