General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo...how would YOU have reacted to the ruling, if YOU had been in that crowd in Ferguson that night?
Last edited Fri Nov 28, 2014, 10:19 PM - Edit history (1)
Try to get your head into this space:
How do you think you would have reacted to those words
1)If you were a black resident of Ferguson, a city where black people are politically powerless in a city where they are the majority of the population, and Missouri, a state in which it seems(may not be totally true, but it seems)like the entire white population is united in hating and fearing you and working to hold you down by any means necessary.
2)If you were the parents of a black male child, of whatever age, and you now had good reason to believe the cops could get away with eventually murdering your child without any fear of facing any consequences.
3)If you knew that the midterm elections had just given racists and neo-segregationists unassailable majorities in both houses of Congress and larger majorities in the Missouri legislature, thus closing off any real hope(anytime soon, at least)of achieving change through any legal, nonviolent means.
4)If you were in the streets as the cops started firing rounds into the air(you'd have no way of knowing whether they were shooting into the air or not, and no reason to assume they weren't shooting AT you)for no reason(none of the protesters had done anything to antagonize the cops at the point the shooting started).
It would have been admirable if the people of Ferguson had found some other way to react other than what they did...but given the list of factors I listed above, who of us who were not there really has any moral entitlement to judge them(given that almost all of those who did were judging from places of comfort, safety and at least relative privelege?
Just wondering if its even possible for those of us who weren't there, who aren't living those lives in those conditions in that reality, to be able to get inside the heads of those who reacted in the way some in Ferguson did.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)You are stacking lots of your own highly-questionable opinions and assumptions on top of each other.
First of all, no one in America is totally politically powerless.
You are assuming that “it seems like” in Missouri all non-minorities hate black people and want to hold them down.
You are saying that there are no consequences to killing a black child, when, in fact, it can put the shooter and his family through hell and will likely be career-ending.
You are assuming that the policeman “murdered” Michael Brown, despite the grand jury ruling and the coroner's findings that “eyewitness” accounts were physically impossible.
You are suggesting that minority parents aren't smart enough to realize that their own “child” won't be treated the same as a huge, combative 18-year-old stupidly defying police orders.
Smart people didn't participate in the Ferguson demonstrations, which are almost certain to HURT the goals of liberals and Democrats.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)You are suggesting that minority parents aren't smart enough to realize that their own “child” won't be treated the same as a huge, combative 18-year-old stupidly defying police orders.
I see you have your own highly questionable opinions and assumptions, not the least of which is describing Michael Brown as an "huge, combative 18-year-old stupidly defying police orders."
Please do not bother to reply; I have relegated you to my IL, where you'll be in good company.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)IS watching the disasters in the country:
What is the ROLE OF A PROSECUTOR before a GJ S/HE seats? What is the Prosecutor's usual goal in sending a case to the GJ?
And an even more important question regarding the role of the prosecutor in a case involving the death of another human being:
Is it acceptable for a Prosecutor to be the Chairperson of an Organization that is raising funds for the 'Suspect' s/he is asking the GJ to indict on murder charges?
You seem to be very satisfied with this GJ's 'findings' so I wondered if you understood the role of the prosecutor wrt to GJs.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)It should be to find the truth. Nothing more, nothing less.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I doubt the law allows such a blatant conflict of interest.
It also is doubtful that the law allows a prosecutor to lie about important facts relating to the case.
It's hard to find the truth when the prosecutor has been so compromised that doubt is cast on the entire process.
This needed a special prosecutor from the beginning. What ended up happening is exactly WHY people asked for an Independent Prosecutor.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)There was NO justification for the murder of Mike Brown.
None.
I am glad Wilson will never be a cop again.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)their descriptions within several hours of the shooting.
Although even at that time there were inconsistencies,
they were consistent enough that a very clear picture
was painted of what had taken place.
The obfuscation quickly kicked in, chaos in the media,
distracting from the real issue by focus on the violence
in Ferguson, etc.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)phil89
(1,043 posts)Why don't you point out what you disagree with and why? You don't think punching a cop is combative??
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)branford
(4,462 posts)the forensic evidence supported the allegation that Brown attacked Wilson, including blood spattering in the car and autopsy analysis of Brown's hand. It is certainly more than hearsay.
The primary issue actually appears to be whether the shooting occurred after the assault when Brown was allegedly no longer a threat.
I do not understand why some ignore inconvenient evidence when it's simply not necessary. One does not need to deify a victim.
It is easily possible to believe based on actual evidence that Michael Brown robbed the convenience store, assaulted the clerk, engaged in an altercation with Officer Wilson while Wilson was still in his cruiser, and yet nevertheless simultaneously believe the shooting was not justified based on other facts and circumstances.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)
PsychGrad
(239 posts)of Wilson's face - where his left cheek looked red (it did not appear swollen to me at all) - I can honestly say, I do NOT think he was punched in the face even one time by an almost 300 pound man. And, certainly not on the right side of his face which would have been facing AWAY from Mike Brown. How the hell would Mike Brown get his arm inside that vehicle (Wilson is NOT a small man!) around Wilson and punch back towards himself? How does that even work? Wilson's whole "I was so polite and begged them to safely walk on the sidewalk and he turned into this hulk demon and just tried to kill me for no reason" is such bullshit that I'm seriously concerned about our general population and why/how they can even believe it!
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)And because too many people don't know how to use
their own critical thinking. Authorities are believed.
It's an automatic.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)We only have Wilson's testimony to go on about Mike "punching" him. And, please stop condescending with statements like "you don't think punching a cop is combative?" How ridiculous! You would be more accurate to ask, "you don't think Mike punched Wilson?" And my answer would be a resounding "NO!"
Mike's friend Dorian's testimony is quite different, and -- to me -- significantly more credible. Dorian described Wilson becoming angry and combative when he tried to open his car door INTO Mike and Dorian, then grabbed Mike's arm THROUGH the window. By the way, like Dorian, Wilson is an "eyewitness," and we've all been warned about Dorian that "eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable." Why, then, since Wilson is also an 'eyewitness,' is Wilson's testimony any MORE reliable than Dorian's?!
I have seen pictures of Wilson, taken right after the alleged 'assault' and I've had worse injuries bumping my head when I didn't bend down far enough to get in my car! His description of Mike Brown is full of racist innuendo, AND he lied about how far Mike was from his squad car. Gosh, I could go on, but...
I just have to wonder how you and many others can swallow Wilson's convoluted narrative. There are holes in his story so big, you could drive a Mack truck through them.
Anyway, thanks for your response, as it helps me to update my IL.
PsychGrad
(239 posts)As a person who has to figure out the truth from teenagers constantly as my job, I believe Dorian Johnson. I felt like his testimony had enough incriminating things against himself that he was being absolutely truthful. He admitted he smokes weed, was trying to find some cigars to roll blunts, that he was with Mike Brown at the store during the "robbery" (I can barely type that with a straight face, seriously) and then he just is going to lie from that point on about every single detail? Why? What does he gain? How does he benefit? It's ludicrous.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)Show anything I said was incorrect, or admit that you are as resistant to facts as Teabaggers are.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)This case has been discussed for weeks and you are lacking facts. Completely and absolutely. You have an authoritarian streak. And seem to think cops can do no wrong. This isn't the first time I have seen you defend the undefendable.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)
TBF
(32,047 posts)First of all, no one in America is totally politically powerless. ---> Yes, they are. We've been rendered powerless by Citizens United.
You are assuming that “it seems like” in Missouri all non-minorities hate black people and want to hold them down. ---> Overall it doesn't matter much what individuals do - it is the crushing systemic abuse that is preventing folks from having any chance.
You are saying that there are no consequences to killing a black child, when, in fact, it can put the shooter and his family through hell and will likely be career-ending. ---> We'll see him on FAUX news. Meanwhile, unarmed kid is buried 6 foot under. Excuse me if I don't shed a tear for the poor, poor, misunderstood policeman.
You are assuming that the policeman “murdered” Michael Brown, despite the grand jury ruling and the coroner's findings that “eyewitness” accounts were physically impossible. ---> The fix was in from the start. The "prosecutor's" father was murdered by an African American. He was not unbiased. He "statement" was the closing statement of a defense attorney. There was no way Wilson was going to be indicted, much less shown a trial, under this guy's watch.
You are suggesting that minority parents aren't smart enough to realize that their own “child” won't be treated the same as a huge, combative 18-year-old stupidly defying police orders. ---> "big scary black man". Truly I have no idea what you are doing on this website. You are nowhere near a democrat in outlook.
Smart people didn't participate in the Ferguson demonstrations, which are almost certain to HURT the goals of liberals and Democrats. ---> I think you realize our goals are to work towards a society that is more harmonious and equal for all. The only way we've accomplished anything close to equality at points in this country is due to our protests (8-hour workdays, O/T on weekends, ability for all to attend decent schools, women voting, etc -- all accomplished through multiple marches/protests). And I think you hate that we are demanding equality as evidenced by these horrible statements you've presented here. Perhaps you think it is great fun to be a mole on this site, but coming here and defending a murderer is not amusing to us.
phil89
(1,043 posts)your claim that the fix was in. What are you talking about?
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)and presenting the case as if he were defense counsel.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)Your comments contain little, if any, logic.
All you have are opinions that don't make much sense.
Go to my YouTube channel and see plenty of proof that I am a liberal Democrat. Here is a link to my Anti-Republican Funny Song:
TBF
(32,047 posts)because you are unable to.
Liberal:
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)I'm sorry but F you.
Who the hell are you to judge what "smart" did or didn't do? That statement is so demeaning, judgmental, and frankly stupid that I cannot let it go without a response. It is "stupid" to say that "smart" people didn't participate because it's a ludicrous statement. Were you there to give every single participant an IQ test upon their entry or exit to the protest? If not, then you need to take that nonsense back.
Oh, and by the way, most people don't decide what they will and won't do with their lives on the basis of whether what they do in their spare time will "HURT the goals of liberals and Democrats." Even Anthony Weiner clearly doesn't make decisions this way, and he actually had a reason to do so, whereas residents of Ferguson clearly do not. What have "liberals and Democrats" done for them?
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 5, 2014, 01:48 AM - Edit history (2)
That's who. How dare you insult hundreds, even thousands of people you've never met. Just because some people care about speaking up about injustice in their community, and you don't, does not give you the right to blanketly insult their intelligence. That's just a sad commentary on you, not them.
ecstatic
(32,685 posts)I was with my parents when the grand jury decision was read, and my mom was so angry that she said they need to burn the whole town down. And she's technically in the 1% as far as income. I was pissed, but it never occurred to me to "burn it down," although my mom's words did incite me/escalate my anger.
In other words, I think I could've easily been persuaded to go along with the rioting had I been there. Tears were last year after Z went free. How many times in a row can people be expected to cry and just take it?
brooklynite
(94,502 posts)I have no objection to complaining, but you should at least know what you're complaining about. Missouri doesn't in fact have "racist voter id laws". It allows:
Identification issued by the state of Missouri, an agency of the state, or a local election authority of the state
Identification issued by the United States government or agency thereof
Identification issued by an institution of higher education, including a university, college, vocational and technical school, located within the state of Missouri
A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or other government document that contains the name and address of the voter
Driver's license or state identification card issued by another state
...which you could have learned with 10 minutes of research.
Beyond that, whether or not I "understand", I don't think a violent reaction would be my response.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(although I do think we can assume that state placed as many impediments as possible in the paths of black, latino, poor white, young, elderly and LGBTQ voters as it could).
brooklynite
(94,502 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)This is the same "Democratic" governor who was lecturing people about avoiding "violent protests" at a time when ALL the violence associated with this was committed by the cops.
Jay Nixon calling himself a Dem means nothing. Same with McCulloch. They both got elected as "law and order" candidates, pledged to keep "them" down.
White Missouri Dems are just future Repubs. They should all just cross over now and be done with it.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)but I can assure you, he beats the alternative http://www.democraticunderground.com/1061299
PsychGrad
(239 posts)can confirm. I do, luckily, live close to a pocket of Democrats - but by and large, this is a red state, mostly rural and uneducated. And very, very racist. Even where I am I couldn't put signs or bumper stickers in support of Obama for serious fear of having my house burned down or myself being physically harmed. These xtian racists ALL have guns in these parts, and you really have to be careful about what you say around here. Even our long time "Democrat" rep, what's his name that recently died? Yeah, I researched his votes - he voted like a Republican on EVERYTHING. He was in office for a million years and had a D by his name, but it was such a joke.
But - there are non-racist people here. But, we have to be VERY careful about where and to whom we voice that. And, we do what we can, where we can - but yeah, it's fighting upstream the whole way. I pass a billboard (hand made) sign every day that says, "Monkey in the White House".
avebury
(10,952 posts)We really need a 21st Century version of Gandhi and Martin Luther King to create a massive nation wide non-violent movement. Only then might we have the possibility of shaming this country and our leaders into creating positive change. I never in a million years that we would get to the point where you feel that we need to appeal to the UN and other countries for help within our own borders.
It seems like nothing has really changed. Republicans and Tea Partiers are all about trying to deny those who are not like them the right to vote. A militarized police forces has become the 21st Century version of the KKK. The Department of Homeland Security with the Patriot Act and warrantless wiretaps has been turned against our own citizens. No parent should have to be worried, every time their child leaves the house, that the child may not make it home alive and in one piece. There is no justice or equality in this country.
If you look at what is going on with the police in this country it is beyond insane (like the guy that was arrested in Colorado because the cops felt threatened when he pointed a BANANA at them). Unbelievable.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)But it always goes to the question(don't take this personally, it's not meant as an attack on you)of who does and who does not have the right to call for the emergence of such a figure.
In the U.S. in the Sixties, whites who demanded that blacks be nonviolent were, whether they realized it or not, often essentially saying(as black ears heard this)"you people owe it to US to make it as easy as possible for the white cops and the white mobs to kill you". People who made those demands usually knew that they, themselves, were never going to be at any risk of injury or death in the situation.
Calls for a new Gandhi or a new MLK MUST always be accompanied, at the very least, with equally loud demands that the authorities do nothing to physically harm nonviolent protesters. And those who make such calls should feel obligated to put THEMSELVES on the firing line as well, to walk the same walk they demand of others.
It's not about being "pro-violence"-it's about being anti-hypocrisy.
mythology
(9,527 posts)for the civil rights movement. That by remaining non-violent in the face of violence, they managed to get the majority of people (especially those outside of the south) to sympathize with their plight.
avebury
(10,952 posts)like a Gandhi or MLK is that, far too often, there is no cohesion in the protest process. That is why Occupy Wall Street did not do as well as it could. When you have a bunch of protests here there and yonder all you have are a series of protests and you probably won't achieve any long term results. Both Gandhi and MLK were charismatic in that they were good at really pulling people to their cause. We do not have anybody like that at this time. Yes there are protests now but eventually they will die down until we have the next Treyvon Martin or Michael Brown incident and then it will start back up.
In the absence of a method of creating a unified protest from coast to coast, thereby grabbing global attention, realistically nothing will change. The key demographic to appeal to is the young people (college age - 20s or so and they are the future) because they are more open to creating change and are not as close minded as the aging white population. Protest conducted without methodology and an end game plan is just an inefficient short term process and ends up working to the benefit of the Conservatives and Tea Party crowd.
At this point in time, the best tool out there is the Anonymous group and the way they work behind the scenes to get the information that they put out there.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)In the meantime, let's bemoan that average people have no power and only MLK or Gandhi can save us while we sit on our collective arses. 
avebury
(10,952 posts)is typical of the current protest methodology that only feeds into the "See we told you they are only thugs" talking points of the Republicans/Tea Party/Fox News = go for it. Like it or not the typical person really does not have much impact to create change. If they did, Occupy Wall Street would have been a rousing success.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)The rest of us should sit around and wait for the heroes to come along. I get it.
I'm sure every Jew alive today because some average person helped hide him or her or smuggle him or her out of Nazi-occupied territory is really glad that many people avoid your status quo enabling advice.
Who do you think heroes are? They are you and me.
-----------
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. –Margaret Mead
You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result. –Mahatma Gandhi
The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do bad things, but because of those who look on and do nothing. –Albert Einstein
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. –Sir Edmund Burke
He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. –Martin Luther King, Jr.
Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. –Ralph Waldo Emerson
----------------
I don't think a single one of these people is advocating that we wait for a hero to come along and rescue us. They want us to rescue ourselves.
PS Protesting does not equal thuggery. Anyone who says, "we should not protest because we might be labeled thugs" is just doing the dirty work of the status quo. Who cares what FOX labels protestors? The only people who watch FOX already agree with FOX anyway. That's not really the target audience.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)http://www.brothermalcolm.net/archivedsites/hotx.htm
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Last edited Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:56 PM - Edit history (1)
focused response that concentrated on taking the rebellion to the wealthy suburbs. (I've heard from comrades there that residents were confined to Ferguson and could not easily get out. Not sure how true that is.) I would have preferred to see a regional uprising that brought in the masses from St. Louis Metropolitan and from East St. Louis.
I'm going to be demanding that my Socialist and Communist comrades engage in some serious self-criticism around the questions of what went wrong there and why and how to improve things for the next time round. If they refuse to engage in that self-criticism -- some were even glorifying the fires and brigandage the day after -- I will probably return to being a Melvillean isolato and leave the dreams of a Socialist Utopia to the next generation.
That said, I do not know how I personally would have responded had I been there. I don't know how I would do were I black and living there under that constant stress. I'm guessing probably not very well. I tend to respond poorly when my 'fight or flight' adrenaline response is triggered. Who knows, though. I might find myself rising to the occasion.
My wife adds that when she is in fear -- as when the guns were going off -- her instinctive response is to "take cover and hide."
Damned good question(s) and I appreciate deeply your asking them.
ileus
(15,396 posts)even if it had been my own son. I'm not going to let emotions put me in that place ever.
TBF
(32,047 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)Some people are not at home in an angry crowd and
for such people it's probably not productive to be there.
Not for one's son, not for the cause. There are other
ways to fight.
backwoodsbob
(6,001 posts)1)Why are blacks the majority yet politically powerless?If you don't vote you can't win
2)Teach your children not to assault cops?
3)Again,if you don't vote you can't win
4)So telling a cop he is too big of a pussy to shoot you and punching him in the face is non confrontational?
Here's a thought...don't commit a strongarm robbery and then punch a cop in the face
840high
(17,196 posts)phil89
(1,043 posts)or destroyed property. That is mindless, unfocused and counterproductive. I would have remained peaceful.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I would not be shocked or outraged...just sad. I'd probably go home and drink. Feeling defeated and depressed. That is what I would do.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Peacefully. But, since I was in the safety of my own home and could express myself openly, I yelled "Burn the mother f......re to the ground" I also yelled "shut that mother f,,,,,re up" referring to the prosecutor. Yeah, I was angry.
sarisataka
(18,600 posts)Of avoiding areas where trouble is likely regardless of the reason, so I would not join such a protest.
Should I find myself in a situation I would join those protecting businesses from the few who seek to damage them.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I would not vandalize or destroy any property purposely.
I would try to peacefully protest the decision.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You state, and I quote:
"...some other way to react other than what they did..."
How did they react in that crowd? As far as I could tell, in that crowd, they were mostly peaceful.
Out side of that crowd were some people doing unlawful things - stating fires and whatnot. Basically could have been as few as 5 people committing those crimes.
And where was the NG? Are you telling us that the NG didn't have a clue that crimes would be committed at those other places?
Very few people comitted crimes that night. To label the actions as those few as hose of the "People of Ferguson" would be a bigoted claim. Just don't do that, wbma.
