MAGA Riots, Woke Riots, impeachment, and hypocracy

Post Reply New Topic

During the impeachment debate, a number of Republicans called out Democrats for being all upset about the MAGA riot when being at least sympathetic to or excusing the widespread rioting following the murder of George Floyd. Anybody who has read my posts knows I am probably the most consistent critic on this site of BLM, Antifa, and local and state politicians who did not enforce laws against rioting out of apparent sympathy with the cause. The other "conservatives" have been banned or have left the site.

While I agree that the democrats who a few months ago were enabling woke riots who are now appalled are hypocrites there are two humongous problems with Republicans calling them out on it. The woke inspired riots are state and local matters that had nothing to do with what was voted on. If you are against enabling riots the last thing you should have done is vote against impeachment. As consistently nauseated as I was with how a lot of state and local politicians handled the woke riots none of them ever spoke to the rioters before they stormed police stations nor told the rioters they loved them.

Riots are the language of the unheard. What was being unheard by either groups when the riots happened?

"Woke" riots?

The President said he “loved” the rioters via Twitter.

That sort of says it all.

Cuomo never said, say, that he “loved” the looters in NYC. He called them “criminals,” instead.

There were no BLM or Antifa riots last year. I grew up in Baltimore and I would know a riot if I saw one

However here's an uplifting piece from the Baltimore Sun, enjoy!

I can't wait until the Woke movement is over.

Where exactly is this hypocrisy of which you speak?

The summer protests(some of which turned into riots, and some of which stayed peaceful but were broken up by violence by the police ) were not in any sense the property of any particular political party (Democrat, or otherwise). So it was never the job of any particular political party to stop the riots. The riots were spontaneous combustion inspired by the sight of a man being killed on camera on TV, and would have happened even if the Democrat party didnt exist.

In contrast Trump IS the sole owner and proprietor of the Capital Hill attack because he inspired it with his words by refusing to concede defeat in an honest and fair election- and preaching to his followers to keep on fighting, and to distrust the whole democratic process. It wouldnt have happened had Trump comported himself like a conventional defeated candidate who encourages conciliation in a concession speech. Trump was at least criminally negligent, and would have been sued for such because of the foreseeable consenquences of his words had this been some normal business situation. And arguably he was worse than criminally negligent, and was guilty of actual malice of forethought.

If the DNC had created a deep fake video of George Floyd being snuffed by cops infront of a camera on national TV (and if George Floyd were really still alive in hiding) then That would be the equivalent of the lies Trump would tell in his speeches and tweets about the election being stolen. And even then...the resulting "woke rioters" never attempted to seize the Capitol and to overturn a national election.

I'd agree with what's said throughout the thread above that the factors of coagulation are different, and with last week the President's role was a serious problem. At the rioters level they seem to be rough equivalents to one another across the political spectrum.

The impression that this lends - this is the sort of entropy you see when systems start failing. It's not that these people are like fruit flies that seem to show up or go away based on the abundance or rotten fruit, they're always there but when things are going well they don't have anything to rally around. I'd add - things could be going far worse, just that the amplification of what seem to be very niche and specific American political issues seems to be broadcast around the globe thanks to social media.

What I found alarming about the George Floyd riots for example wasn't that they happened in the US, Rodney King was a similar kind of flash point and this time we had people pent up in their houses for months prior. Even seeing him painted as if he were some martyred saint didn't surprise me - this is sort of how archetypes work. What did shock and worry me was seeing support riots around the globe and the potential for anything kicking off anywhere now, at least in 'the west', to trigger seemingly global reactions seems like something new. I guess it's less shocking when there's a terrorist bombing somewhere in the world and everyone on Facebook puts on their flag filters because hundreds or more people died, it's a slightly different animal if it ever escalates into world-wide college May Day over one person being killed somewhere (it wasn't *that* bad but it seemed to be more in that direction than I would have ever anticipated). It's not that we shouldn't care when these things happen, just that we have to figure out what reactions on our part actually help make the situation worse, and we still have to figure out what to do with just how much of an amplifying effect social media has.