.
Hello Capn.
Besides you, who says they don't?
excon
It's too bad but war is the only way to protect ourselves from Bad governments who would love to destroy us.
Rioting is nothing but a bunch of losers who do it for the sake of destruction and stealing from hard working people.
Hello again, people:
I see that I've confused you.. But, it's NOT a difficult proposition.. Both rioting and war are politics by force. Yes, one is an army, and the other are residents from the hood.
So?
excon
Hello M:
I KNEW you'd get it.
excon
Hello Tom:
I didn't ascribe a VALUE judgement to either of those activities. See if you can answer my question using the same criteria..
I say that because there are BAD wars and GOOD riots. Or, maybe you don't view the Tea Party as a riot where people LOOTED somebody's private property..
excon
There is a time and a place for everything.
Though when the right wing gets angry about something, our anger is so much more focused. If we decide to protest, we don't burn random cars, or trash random businesses belonging to random people. The right wing never makes war against society itself.
The left will always make war against society because it furthers their agenda. The more society falls apart, the more pretext to empower the state to hold it all together. The more poverty, the more pretext to transfer wealth from the middle class to the poor. It's a parasite that feeds on human suffering.
Hello N:
True, but what material difference does that make?
excon
That depends on the cause excon. I would maintain that there can be just or principled conflicts (of all sizes) that are necessary. I suspect many would say the same, though of course opinions on what constitutes just and necessary will often vary widely.
It is also true that the catalysts for such events (again of whatever size) do not exist in isolation. I've seen the expected chimes saying, 'Bad black people - he had a real gun (not a child with a toy) - don't bad-mouth the police/they brought it on themselves, etc' but these are almost always given in response to a single incident. Not only does this ignore previous incidents/training/attitudes that may influence behaviour on all sides, but it is then magically applied for all incidents in order to support a perspective. I call that fundamentally dishonest..
Riots aren't caused by one thing or two or ten, but a host of things, the last being the proverbial straw. This can be, but usually is not the case with wars. Simply put, the bigger the conflict, the faster some humans seem to want to make it happen (as long as you're sure you're going to win).
Hello AS:
I promise you, if the guys from the hood could AFFORD tanks, they'd attack the other guys with tanks and leave the gas stations alone. They attack the gas stations because that's what's presented.
But, you're incorrect.. Ordinarily right wingers eschew rioting.. But, when it SUITS their purpose, they're no different than the guys from the hood... Or, do you think the Tea Party was actually a tea party?? Or, when the cops RIOTED in Chicago in 1968.. How about more recently, when the cops RIOTED against the people in Ferguson?
Yes, when RIOTING serves a RIGHT WING purpose, you engage in it.. Just because you have TANKS doesn't give you any moral authority...
excon
Destruction, both are destruction.
If I ever rise up in resistance it will be surgical, not indiscriminate. There is nothing that would have me destroying random property belonging to people who are not my enemy.
When a person randomly destroys property they must consider anyone who owns property to be their enemy. They see it as membership of an oppressive ruling class. Anyone who thinks that way is my enemy.
con,
Can you give an example or two of the Taxed Enough Already crowd having ever damaged the property of others or of the State, let alone engaged in the looting of private property? No? Didn't think so.
Perhaps when they read the 1st Amendment they didn't gloss over that word "peaceful" that comes before "assembly for the redress of grievances". Look it up.
I thought that you believed in the Constitution but I apparently not.
Of course right-wingers like rioting.
It often legally gives members of police departments a chance to test their marksmanship skills during actual urban warfare. Plus it breaks the boredom of the "average" newscast.
Who said that?
Oh, hi. What?
I only believe in attacking people who deserve to be attacked. I think almost everyone feels that way. If they attack indiscriminately, it's because they think everyone deserves to be attacked. They consider everyone their enemy. I can't imagine believing that since it's so obviously false.
Aside from the immorality of it, it's also tactically stupid. Uprisings tend to succeed by inspiring sympathy in 3rd parties. Indiscriminate attacks lose that sympathy. As soon as someone accuses me of being a member of some oppressive ruling class, they lose my sympathy. I will not tolerate cultural Marxism.
I have no liberal guilt in me. I don't hold myself responsible for what others have done. I don't accept collective punishment. Whatever they may have suffered at the hands of others doesn't give them license to take it out on me. If someone treats me as an enemy, they are my enemy.
Hello again, AS:
I got it.. War is good because the PEOPLE who wage war are good.. But, rioting is bad, because PEOPLE who riot are bad..
excon
I didn't say that at all. I said there is a time and a place for everything. Some wars are just. Some aren't. Some riots are just. Some aren't.
In my opinion, the recent unrest is unjust. They're just scum who think society owes something because of their massive delusions of persecution. So f*** them.
Rioting with big BILLS to back it.
Me, I say it as well. Now there are 2 of us.
