Advertisement
by Mirjt » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:52 pm
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Thu Jul 09, 2020 12:12 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
If you're not even going to try, not even one word, then I'll find someone else who will.
Maybe stop being "for" something you're embarrassed to put into your own words?
I have already explained it in my own words multiple times in the main threads. Since that apparently did not clarify it for you, I aided by directing you to a video where a nice British white man takes 15 minutes to explain it, in the hopes that that is more clear.
by Liriena » Thu Jul 09, 2020 12:45 am
The Emerald Legion wrote:It's a decentralized hate mob,
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Mirjt » Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:10 am
by Slavakino » Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:11 am
Stylan wrote:Slavakino wrote:PMC's overrun or Martial Law. Defunding cops is stupid, its only a wet dream for stupid AnCaps or AnComs who don't realise anarchism will ruin their lives
Not related, but your views are the most fucking obnoxious, Internet-era contradictory beliefs ever.
Anyway, yeah anarchism sucks.
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:19 am
by Nobel Hobos 2 » Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:21 am
by Slavakino » Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:29 am
by ImperialRussia » Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:32 am
by Anurial » Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:42 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:So we're hearing a lot of talk about defunding police and putting that money into social services instead. The idea, presumably, is that if these "social services" could somehow address every other possible motive for committing crime in the first place, we wouldn't need as much policing.
Here's the problem with that proposal... since when was anyone any good at predicting anyone else's motives for what they do?
No, really. I recall 2016, when the notion that respondents who claimed they'd vote Clinton if she were the candidate were lying through their teeth were met with "why would they lie"? Doesn't matter. They did. People do what they do for reasons neither you nor I nor the so-called "experts" who got it wrong could ever hope to comperehend. The delusion that if you do not anticipate their motives, such motives cannot exist, feels like a false dichotomy fit to rival "God of the gaps."
So now proposals to defund the police invoke the delusion that they have every possible motive for crime figured out; and they want us to, based on this tenuous reasoning, weaken the one institution known to hold crime back.
My question to them is; what if you're wrong? What is your plan B, if people have reasons for committing crimes that you fail to anticipate, predict, or comprehend, and these reasons are all unleashed? Is a return to policing as it was before possible, or would the change, or at least some of the effects thereof, be permanent? Is there a third option you could jump to from there, that might be relatively safer? If so, what is it?
My alternative? If we think we know why crime happens, then rather than defunding the police, why not address those supposed motives first, and then weaken police presence very slowly and gradually so if it works out badly we can reverse the trend before it's too late?
21st October
✉ Anarquía Mirror: 7 remaining Liberal MLAs form the Independent Group | International Mirror: Right-wing militias join Karsian military in fight against communist militias | Politipoll Weekly: PSF 42.3%, PDS 36.3%, SU 4.3%, AF 0.1%, CU 3.1%, PP 5.1%, Co 3.6%, IL 1.1%, CG 4.1%
by Dumb Ideologies » Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:14 am
by The Emerald Legion » Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:15 am
by Thepeopl » Thu Jul 09, 2020 11:54 am
Anurial wrote:LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:So we're hearing a lot of talk about defunding police and putting that money into social services instead. The idea, presumably, is that if these "social services" could somehow address every other possible motive for committing crime in the first place, we wouldn't need as much policing.
Here's the problem with that proposal... since when was anyone any good at predicting anyone else's motives for what they do?
No, really. I recall 2016, when the notion that respondents who claimed they'd vote Clinton if she were the candidate were lying through their teeth were met with "why would they lie"? Doesn't matter. They did. People do what they do for reasons neither you nor I nor the so-called "experts" who got it wrong could ever hope to comperehend. The delusion that if you do not anticipate their motives, such motives cannot exist, feels like a false dichotomy fit to rival "God of the gaps."
So now proposals to defund the police invoke the delusion that they have every possible motive for crime figured out; and they want us to, based on this tenuous reasoning, weaken the one institution known to hold crime back.
My question to them is; what if you're wrong? What is your plan B, if people have reasons for committing crimes that you fail to anticipate, predict, or comprehend, and these reasons are all unleashed? Is a return to policing as it was before possible, or would the change, or at least some of the effects thereof, be permanent? Is there a third option you could jump to from there, that might be relatively safer? If so, what is it?
My alternative? If we think we know why crime happens, then rather than defunding the police, why not address those supposed motives first, and then weaken police presence very slowly and gradually so if it works out badly we can reverse the trend before it's too late?
That's not what defunding the police means. It means social services respond to situations that police aren't even trained to in the first place. Why send a cop to deal with a drunk homeless man for instance. Also, criminology and sociology are the fields of study that aim to seek out the causes of crime. Lastly, defunding the police on a local scale does seem to have been rather effective so far, like in this town of 170,000.
This appears to just be a misunderstanding of what defunding the police actually means. Most policy proposals are trialled at lower levels of governance beforehand too. This is why Finland funded a study for UBI instead of just implementing it, and why the UK Labour party promised to begin trials for a UBI program in 2019 if they were elected, rather than just implementing it. This is also why people are looking at these already tried and tested changes in the institution of police in towns.
As always with these kinds of threads, I haven't read what comes before my post because it's usually very painful to do so. Therefore, if I've missed some sort of context given or misunderstanding cleared up, I apologise.
by Slavakino » Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:16 pm
Thepeopl wrote:Anurial wrote:
That's not what defunding the police means. It means social services respond to situations that police aren't even trained to in the first place. Why send a cop to deal with a drunk homeless man for instance. Also, criminology and sociology are the fields of study that aim to seek out the causes of crime. Lastly, defunding the police on a local scale does seem to have been rather effective so far, like in this town of 170,000.
This appears to just be a misunderstanding of what defunding the police actually means. Most policy proposals are trialled at lower levels of governance beforehand too. This is why Finland funded a study for UBI instead of just implementing it, and why the UK Labour party promised to begin trials for a UBI program in 2019 if they were elected, rather than just implementing it. This is also why people are looking at these already tried and tested changes in the institution of police in towns.
As always with these kinds of threads, I haven't read what comes before my post because it's usually very painful to do so. Therefore, if I've missed some sort of context given or misunderstanding cleared up, I apologise.
^^
More compassion, less jail time.
by West Leas Oros 2 » Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:06 pm
WLO Public News: Outdated Factbooks and other documents in process of major redesign! ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: <error:not found>
by Bassoe » Fri Jul 10, 2020 7:55 pm
by Rojava Free State » Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:09 pm
Rojava Free State wrote:Listen yall. I'm only gonna say it once but I want you to remember it. This ain't a world fit for good men. It seems like you gotta be monstrous just to make it. Gotta have a little bit of darkness within you just to survive. You gotta stoop low everyday it seems like. Stoop all the way down to the devil in these times. And then one day you look in the mirror and you realize that you ain't you anymore. You're just another monster, and thanks to your actions, someone else will eventually become as warped and twisted as you. Never forget that the best of us are just the best of a bad lot. Being at the top of a pile of feces doesn't make you anything but shit like the rest. Never forget that.
by Stylan » Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:09 pm
Bassoe wrote:Step #1. Disband the police.
Step #2. Inevitable colossal rise in crime.
Step #3. Introduce the CAREN act, under which crime is less likely to be officially reported due to the risk of ruinous fines and being targeted bythe Two Minute HateCancel Culture if the reporter and the judge in the inevitable lawsuit isn't absolutely sure it was justified.
Step #4. Less officially reported crime, less crime charges.
Step #5. "What crime! You've got no evidence!"
by Rojava Free State » Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:11 pm
Rojava Free State wrote:Listen yall. I'm only gonna say it once but I want you to remember it. This ain't a world fit for good men. It seems like you gotta be monstrous just to make it. Gotta have a little bit of darkness within you just to survive. You gotta stoop low everyday it seems like. Stoop all the way down to the devil in these times. And then one day you look in the mirror and you realize that you ain't you anymore. You're just another monster, and thanks to your actions, someone else will eventually become as warped and twisted as you. Never forget that the best of us are just the best of a bad lot. Being at the top of a pile of feces doesn't make you anything but shit like the rest. Never forget that.
by Stylan » Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:12 pm
by Big Jim P » Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:40 pm
by Slavakino » Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:39 pm
by Purpelia » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:32 am
Slavakino wrote:Stylan wrote:>me
>a libertarian
lmfao dude
I just think it's funny you call yourself a commie when in reality you're basically just a strasserist, or even worse a social democrat who hates gays and blacks.
I consider myself a Titoist (or Marxist-Leninist if you wanna go that route) with socially conservative views. I'm not a modern commie, I want my Yugo back. I dislike Stalinists, progressive lefties and these "fake commies" heavily
by Baltenstein » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:35 am
Slavakino wrote:Stylan wrote:>me
>a libertarian
lmfao dude
I just think it's funny you call yourself a commie when in reality you're basically just a strasserist, or even worse a social democrat who hates gays and blacks.
I consider myself a Titoist (or Marxist-Leninist if you wanna go that route) with socially conservative views. I'm not a modern commie, I want my Yugo back. I dislike Stalinists, progressive lefties and these "fake commies" heavily
by Purpelia » Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:42 am
Baltenstein wrote:Slavakino wrote:I consider myself a Titoist (or Marxist-Leninist if you wanna go that route) with socially conservative views. I'm not a modern commie, I want my Yugo back. I dislike Stalinists, progressive lefties and these "fake commies" heavily
Titoism died when Tito died. It was an artificial construct whose continuing existence depended largely on the personal charisma and force of will of a single person.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, Europa Undivided, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Neu California, Post War America, Spirit of Hope, Stormandia, Tungstan, Turenia, Unmet Player
Advertisement