“When you shout BREAKING POINT over and over again, you don’t get to be surprised when someone breaks.”

zoogs

zoogs

New member
Vox: The best explanation I’ve seen of how politicians like Trump feed violence

There are some good thoughts here on the nature of political discourse. What a horrible thing that happened in England this week, with the murder of a prominent politician by a far-right radical in the midst of their 'Brexit' debate. The below is sourced from Alex Massie, a columnist at a conservative British magazine.

When you encourage rage you cannot then feign surprise when people become enraged. You cannot turn around and say, ‘Mate, you weren’t supposed to take it so seriously. It’s just a game, just a ploy, a strategy for winning votes.’

When you shout BREAKING POINT over and over again, you don’t get to be surprised when someone breaks. When you present politics as a matter of life and death, as a question of national survival, don’t be surprised if someone takes you at your word. You didn’t make them do it, no, but you didn’t do much to stop it either.

Sometimes rhetoric has consequences. If you spend days, weeks, months, years telling people they are under threat, that their country has been stolen from them, that they have been betrayed and sold down the river, that their birthright has been pilfered, that their problem is they’re too slow to realise any of this is happening, that their problem is they’re not sufficiently mad as hell, then at some point, in some place, something or someone is going to snap. And then something terrible is going to happen.

We can’t control the weather but, in politics, we can control the climate in which the weather happens.
Click to expand...
The Intercept has more: https://theintercept.com/2016/06/17/why-is-the-killer-of-british-mp-jo-cox-not-being-called-a-terrorist/

At the very least, a good deal of introspection is occurring over the nasty climate that's been fostered.



It's a good opportunity to look (from these distant shores, in a political context in which most of us likely have only passing interest) at what happens when we yield to fear; the worst demons of our nature quickly come out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With political discourse now days with a 24 hour news cycle and constant media outlets needing to put out the most outrageous head lines to make you read their crap, this is the sad result.

 
While on the topic of Brexit, an LA times op-ed:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-klaas-dirsus-leave-victory-in-britain-20160623-snap-story.html

We find ourselves in a moment of global fear. The democratic identities of Britain and the United States are under threat — not from immigrants or even changing values, but from nationalists and xenophobes exploiting citizens' darkest worries with populist projects, including Donald Trump’s campaign for the U.S. presidency and Brexit. To many voters, the world is a scary place. Terrorists seem to lurk everywhere. Uncertainty surrounds us. Change is rapid and some aren't keeping up. Unsurprisingly, politicians of many stripes are capitalizing on our fears to rally voters against trade, immigration and international cooperation.

The costs will be substantial. Economists, business leaders and scholars almost universally agree that Britain's retreat from the EU is a self-inflicted economic blunder. Recessions are contagious, and given London’s place as a global financial hub, Brexit will give Britain a particularly virulent cough. The pound’s value will likely tumble. The British treasury estimates that the nation’s households each stand to lose an average of £4,300, or about $7,000. And yet, tens of millions of voters were willing to take that hit.
Click to expand...
The bold is really well put. And to the paragraph below, huh. I sort of wonder how this all came to a vote, but I haven't really followed Brexit from the beginning.

And some coverage of some of its more ... interesting proponents:

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2016/06/24/brexit-disaster-a-great-night-for-anime-nazis-trump-fans-and-dudes-who-say-cuck-a-lot/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It breaks both ways regarding rhetoric.

I don't think is has been wise use of rhetoric when Obama, Holder, Lynch etc berate police officers and jump to hasty conclusions on several occasions during the past 7 years in order to move ahead their political agenda. Harvard professor/Cop situation, Trevon Martin, Fergeson, Baltimore etc We end up wt riots in Fergeson, Baltimore, distrust of law enforcement - and the rise of Black Lives Matter.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/31/police-wait-for-obama-support-as-rhetoric-turns-ag/

https://www.mrconservative.com/2015/05/58443-obama-responds-to-murder-of-nypd-officer-by-blaming-police/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/11/sheriff-blames-deaths-of-mississippi-officers-on-obamas-war-on-police/

https://www.mrconservative.com/2015/04/58216-obama-slams-us-police-in-baltimore-they-target-poor-african-americans/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/obama-police-chief-chicago-scapegoat-black-lives-matter/412717/

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/police-are-tired-barack-obama/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem with most of the rhetoric you are mentioning is that it is just plain false and fictional. If you sprew lies and misrepresentations long enough to enough people, pretty soon some will come to believe them. That has been happening a great deal the past 20 years and the result has been the pushing of this country to the far left politically resulting in leftist policies and practices which are proving to be disasterous for society and are a grave threat to the future of the world. Democracy is NOT a politically liberal idea and is insconsistent with most of the modern day Democrat party platforms and notions.

 
TGHusker said:
It breaks both ways regarding rhetoric.

I don't think is has been wise use of rhetoric when Obama, Holder, Lynch etc berate police officers and jump to hasty conclusions on several occasions during the past 7 years in order to move ahead their political agenda. Harvard professor/Cop situation, Trevon Martin, Fergeson, Baltimore etc We end up wt riots in Fergeson, Baltimore, distrust of law enforcement - and the rise of Black Lives Matter.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/31/police-wait-for-obama-support-as-rhetoric-turns-ag/

https://www.mrconservative.com/2015/05/58443-obama-responds-to-murder-of-nypd-officer-by-blaming-police/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/11/sheriff-blames-deaths-of-mississippi-officers-on-obamas-war-on-police/

https://www.mrconservative.com/2015/04/58216-obama-slams-us-police-in-baltimore-they-target-poor-african-americans/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/obama-police-chief-chicago-scapegoat-black-lives-matter/412717/

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/police-are-tired-barack-obama/
Click to expand...


Here's several more articles - and I can find dozens if not hundreds more beyond this - where Obama praises the police. Strenuously.

http://nypost.com/2015/10/27/obama-says-cops-are-scapegoats-praises-slain-nypd-officer/

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/obama-police-deserve-our-respect-117996

http://www.breitbart.com/law-enforcement/2016/05/16/obama-praises-cops-standing-assault-rifles-handguns/

http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/09/03/foxs-the-five-ignores-obamas-remarks-supporting/205369

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2013/05/11/obama-hails-courage-nation-police-officers/az5Ezlj1RFzDekJd9b0wvM/story.html

You cannot decry Obama's statements as moving "ahead their political agenda" while cherry-picking quotes to push your own agenda. There's a word for that: it's called "hypocrisy."

 
Knapp, that is fair enough. However no hypocrisy is involved. I never said Obama never praises the police. I spoke of several high profile examples. I'm sure he said positive things at times. What I'm saying is that it is not wise to be stirring the pot with such rhetoric prior to getting all of the facts as has occurred in those specific situations that I mentioned. Ferguson - the cop was found to have acted properly. The policeman who 'acted stupidly' at Harvard, was found to have acted properly, the neighborhood security guy who killed Trevon was found to act in self defense, and now Baltimore - the cops one by one are being exonerated (not all trials are completed - the main one with the driver was resolved this week). However, when there is an outcry against the police action, prudence would be the better part of wisdom as a leader and far too often this administration has used it as a wedge issue to advance their narrative. A couple of the articles I attached quoted the police as feeling they are being wrongfully singled out wt the rhetoric.

 
TGHusker, the links you shared aren't actual news; they're tribal conservative rallying cries.

"In his speech, Obama whined about the “racism” in American law enforcement that makes it impossible for black people to succeed. Ignoring the fact that he made it to the highest office in the land as a black man, Obama proceeded to blame U.S. police for all the problems in the black community."

This is not journalism.

Also, of course the police feel wrongfully singled out. Do you know of many other institutions that are more "good ole boys" clubs than the police department? There's no accountability there; if you even hint at a sniff of something that questions a uniform you're the enemy. It's very Bo Pelini esque.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top