Lot to unpack in this response for sure. If you _personally_ feel you're being held up by this "mob based on the color of people's skin" I'm sorry you feel that way, but it shows a severe lack of of understanding when it comes to policing and how that affects communities of color.
If the police followed the "Rule of Law" there wouldn't be a disproportionate amount of Black men who face violence from the police. Should "bad cops" be held accountable? Or is everything fair game when "enforcing the law"?
Similarly, "accede or we will riot" is precisely the logical progression from "we've asked nicely to not kill us". Do you expect Americans to simply watch their family, friends and neighbors being extra-judicially killed?
It's this inability to empathize with a population, and an uncritical view of those who enforce the law that will lead to non-action, leading to more riots.
>If the police followed the "Rule of Law" there wouldn't be a disproportionate amount of Black men who face violence from the police. Should "bad cops" be held accountable? Or is everything fair game when "enforcing the law"?
For sure. but not with violent riots.
>Similarly, "accede or we will riot" is precisely the logical progression from "we've asked nicely to not kill us".
No, its terrorism. I have no problem with protests, but violent riots to push police reform are political violence, something I think leads to only more violence.
>Do you expect Americans to simply watch their family, friends and neighbors being extra-judicially killed?
No. But I expect people who perpetuate violence for political aims to keep perpetuating violence for political aims. I don't think its acceptable unless they're ready to receive political violence in kind.
>It's this inability to empathize with a population,
No. I empathize, but my empathy sits behind the knowledge that the rule of law and state monopoly of force must be maintained or all will devolve into tribal war.
>and an uncritical view of those who enforce the law that will lead to non-action, leading to more riots.
Choosing to commit political violence is a choice the rioters make. If the options are abolish the police or get riots, my reaction is "call in the national guard".
There are plenty of people to empathize with, and I don't think political violence is worth any empathy. Justifying political violence is a precursor to real civil war.
"No. I empathize, but my empathy sits behind the knowledge that the rule of law and state monopoly of force must be maintained or all will devolve into tribal war."
Some political violence is okay if the state is involved? Even if that violence is oppressive?
Politically motivated violence on behalf of the police is why we're in this situation to begin with. Any you're of the opinion that any retaliation to this violence to reform a broken system of state violence is somehow out of turn?
Now all violence is political violence because politically we don't want mobs of violent rioters looting and burning things down, so stopping them is political.
No thanks, I don't believe you to be anywhere near correct. You're an advocate for tribal warfare and that is where your policies will lead. Disaster.
If the police followed the "Rule of Law" there wouldn't be a disproportionate amount of Black men who face violence from the police. Should "bad cops" be held accountable? Or is everything fair game when "enforcing the law"?
Similarly, "accede or we will riot" is precisely the logical progression from "we've asked nicely to not kill us". Do you expect Americans to simply watch their family, friends and neighbors being extra-judicially killed?
It's this inability to empathize with a population, and an uncritical view of those who enforce the law that will lead to non-action, leading to more riots.