26
votes
Daily thread for news/updates/discussion of George Floyd protests - June 3
This thread is posted daily - please try to post relevant content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Especially significant updates may warrant a separate topic, but most should be posted here.
Obama is going to be speaking as part of a "virtual town hall" in 15 minutes: https://www.obama.org/anguish-and-action/
Will be streaming live on YouTube here (also embedded in the page above): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qB6SsErpA
It has been enthralling and terrifying watching these protests unfold on twitter in real time.
I don't know to what extent this stuff has been reported on by media, but here are some posts doing the rounds on twitter:
Some cops taking the opportunity to beat up a protester
George Bush releases surprisingly sympathetic statement
A lot of accusations (plus videos) of cops and white nationalists smashing and looting (to frame protesters) or leaving piles of bricks around to bait them (eg , 2)
This photo
Someone posted a video recorded by the man with the child on his shoulders https://twitter.com/axwise1/status/1267922084648357896
They're aiming at people behind him, and you can hear the cops telling him to get his child out of there, and a female protestor yelling at him about it.
The photographer also posted later saying the officer wasn't aiming at the child https://twitter.com/richardgrant88/status/1267996981525274624
And posted an uncropped original https://twitter.com/richardgrant88/status/1268013208394010624
It's not a GOOD situation at all but it's not what that photo makes it look like either.
Thanks for the additional context. Even in the cropped version it's clear enough that the cop isn't aiming at them. He's aiming significantly to their left (deeper in the image).
According to the associated press this is:
Former defense secretary James Mattis has released a statement denouncing President Trump and describing him as a threat to the Constitution
The full statement is at the bottom of the article, I recommend reading that first. The article is just chunks of the statement interspersed with commentary.
Also Mike Mullens I cannot remain silent
Obviously completely anecdotal but things certainly seem quieter today online. More trending topics related to entertainment and sports, more 'normal' politics news, etc. I just hope the energy and momentum these protests have accumulated doesn't burn out.
Charges against Derek Chauvin have been upgraded to 2nd-degree murder
(this post from what feels like a month ago links to the definitions in Minnesota law of the degrees of murder)
That's really interesting. I read this post by Scott Greenfield (a criminal defense lawyer) the other day, and he wasn't even sure if the case for third-degree was legally sufficient. I'm certainly not qualified to argue about it (and sincerely hope he's wrong), but it's interesting to read anyway for the explanations of some of the relevant legal terms like "eminently dangerous" and "depraved mind".
It was also written before the medical examiner had changed their autopsy to classify it as homicide, and I don't know how much that affects it.
Without being a lawyer, and without being familiar with the way common law conducts itself, my reading is that the probability of 2nd and 3rd degree sticking is relatively similar.
3rd degree is "no intent to kill, but disregard for life and justice", 2nd degree is "intent to kill, but no premeditation". To me, given what we know about the situation, seems like he couldn't have been unaware of his actions being potentially deadly. He was warned and continued, so that reads like intent to kill to me. He clearly did what he did intentionally and without need to do so, and he was told it would kill. Any defense that will get him off on 2nd degree will almost certainly work on 3rd degree too. Think "I'm too stupid to understand that what I did hurts people". Hence you combine 2nd murder with 2nd manslaughter.
The other three officers are also now charged as accessories to second degree murder.
This will take some of the steam out of the protests. If the officers are not convicted, however, it'll probably pick right back up where it left off with a vengeance.
It's a pretty old meme. I always just took it to mean a time period when stuff gets chaotic, and action movie stuff starts happening. With mass protests, riots, looting, a global pandemic, and a spike in unemployment, I'd say we've already entered the cool zone.
I'm not a huge fan of Trevor Noah's Daily Show because no one could ever fill Jon Stewart's shoes, but this ~18 minute video from him is excellent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4amCfVbA_c
It's really quite an excellent video. I've been quoting parts of it to some friends and then suggest they go watch the whole thing.
I'm really quite amazed at how he builds those connections. I don't think there's a single cut in there, and he seems to be improvising huge parts of it. He's probably a hell of a person to have a chat with.
Incredibly illuminating. Thank you for sharing this.
Mirror (Facebook is shit but at least the video isn't blocked in Canada, unlike the above):
https://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow/videos/george-floyd-the-minneapolis-protests-ahmaud-arbery-amy-cooper/271504123969416/
Over the weekend this video clip from Fort Lauderdale made the rounds of a white police officer shoving a protester who was kneeling on the ground with her hands up.
As it turns out, the officer in question has 71 use of force incidents on file. In 4 years he has drawn his gun at least 51 times.
Public speaking.
Draws his gun at least once a month (that we know about) but I guess we'll send him to Toastmasters or something?
The NYT published a good article going over the clearing of protestors and background around Trump's photo op at St. John's Church: How Trump's Idea for a Photo Op Led to Havoc in a Park
Lots of good information and little video clips showing exactly what happened. I highly recommend reading Gini Gerbasi's account that I posted yesterday too, if you haven't already.
Trump's church visit shocks [some] religious leaders
After Trump got the nomination, I, like many others, remember thinking there was no way that he would take the presidency. My perception of this was based on the fact that I come from a deeply religious family and a deeply red community. Christianity, from my perspective, was the Republicans' bread and butter. They played to their Christian base, and their Christian base supported them obediently.
So, when Trump, the most un-Christian candidate you could possibly consider got the nomination, I thought they were done. They failed to elect squeaky clean devout Mormon believer Mitt Romney in 2012, and surely Trump was far less in alignment with Christian values than Romney. Why were they shooting themselves in the foot like this?
My own parents struggled greatly with Trump's nomination. They are devout Christians who live and breathe every word of their faith. My mom has, for decades, woken up before dawn to spend time praying and studying her Bible in the calm stillness of the early morning. They are breathtakingly, admirably devoted to God in everything that they do. For all the problems I have had with my parents and all the problems I have with the ideology of Christianity, I still find the depths of their faith and the consistency in which they live it inspiring.
Trump, as a candidate, was like a slap in the face for them. He represented nothing of which they valued or supported. I remember talking to my mom about him, and she mentioned that in her morning quiet time, she had carefully gone through the "fruits of the spirit": love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. She applied each of them to Trump and could not identify how he embodied even a single one.
The passage from which it comes, Galatians 5, has a lot to say about character and faith. Here are verses 13 to 26 (NASB):
She then looked at the parts I've bolded above, about walking by the Spirit and not by the flesh. Look at the list of the "deeds of the flesh". Trump hits almost every single one.
My parents had fierce debates with their friends and people in their churches about Trump. To my parents, he was completely unsupportable as a candidate. Many of the people they talked to identified the same qualities but still felt they should vote for him not as a vote for Trump but as a vote for the Republican party. Many of them said that they were casting a vote not for Trump, but for Pence, which makes sense as he was chosen likely because of his appeal to Christian America (my parents love Pence). I remember being glowingly proud of my mom when she shared a story about a good friend. The good friend had decided on voting for Trump even though the friend found him abhorrent. Her reasoning was "he's not my guy, but I'm still going to vote for him." My mom, who speaks her truth in everything that she does, simply said in response: "if you vote for him, that means he is your guy."
Prior to the election, my mom also shared with me an article, "Decency for President", written by very well-known and influential Christian author Max Lucado. She identified it as speaking truth to her feelings, and I can understand why. "Decency" was a huge value where I came from. I usually call it "southern hospitality" now that I've left that area, but it's the idea that you lead with kindness because that's just what you do:
My parents did not vote for Trump in the 2016 election -- probably the first time they had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate in their lives. They couldn't support Clinton either, given their right-aligned values, so they wrote in the name of someone else. They knew they were "throwing their vote away" in the larger picture, but for them they were doing the only action that they felt that they could morally.
It feels weird to say this, but it's an honest truth: Trump's election was actually good for our family dynamic. I'm the super-left gay child of super-conservative Christian parents, and where before we could only see our political differences, now we could see so much more common ground. Nothing unites people like a common enemy, and none of my immediate family, no matter their politics, could support him. We've become closer, more understanding, and more appreciative of one another. We talk politics more than we ever used to, and we certainly still have our disagreements, but all of us fundamentally believe that hatred, bile, and instability are not leadership.
What my parents and I have learned since then is just how much of Christianity has aligned itself with the domineering power and hatred that Trump espouses. That was foreign to us. It didn't fit our perception of Christianity; of leading with kindness. My mom shared another conversation she had, this time with a different friend, who had continued to support Trump long into his candidacy, when we could now see his un-Christianity on full display. The friend simply said, icily, "I didn't elect him to be my pastor."
When I talk with her now, my mom says that she believes that, at large, Christians have "sold their souls to the Devil". "We were promised a little bit of what we wanted" she says, and in return they were "tempted into sin" -- into giving up so much of their, and God's, core values.
I sent my mom an apology text yesterday after I saw Trump's publicity stunt with the Bible. I was offended on her behalf. He was using, as a mere prop, the text she holds sacred, that she has poured over and thought through countless times, that she makes time for every. single. morning. of her life. It felt like he was desecrating her faith when he held it up; that the words which she has spent her entire life honoring were cradled in his hateful, unkind, and clearly unbelieving hands.
That he held it upside down and backwards felt like an additional dishonor -- imagine if it had been a flag. That he specified that it was "a Bible", not his, was one more -- another reminder of just how little the book actually means to him. Anyone who studies the Bible regularly knows that you develop a very intimate connection to the physical object itself. It is so much more than just a cover with pages between. It, too, feels like it has a soul. It is, after all, the word of God.
The transparency of his pandering felt like he was demeaning the very core of my mother as a person; the very anchor of her character, upon which she has built her entire life. I wanted to let her know that I support her, and that he has no right to position himself as someone who stands alongside her in faith. He has not earned the authority to wear the word of God. She walks by the Spirit; he walks by the flesh for the camera, through an illusion of peace made by violence, flashbangs, and tear gas.
I like how this is written. If you don't already blog, you should. Not that it means much, but I'm proud of your mother too.
Thanks for the kind words, both for me and my mom!
I've actually tried blogging before but I find it less rewarding. Part of why I write is certainly just for myself, but part of the reason I write is to have my ideas heard and evaluated by an audience. Writing a no-name blog online ends up feeling very lonely -- like you're watching your words float away on the wind into nothingness. The built-in audience of a site like this gives my words the exposure to others that I'm looking for.
Why not combine the two? I've always thought hosting or maintaining blogs was a bit overkill now that sites like Tildes exist; after all, why not just post the article you'd write to Tildes directly? The site loves well-written content, and it's immensely easier to get started what with the lack of all the tedious setup. Combine that with Tildes flexible tagging system for an easy way to connect the posts and you've got a perfect fit.
With how well you articulate your thoughts, I've no doubt in my mind that any article/post you write here as its own topic would be received fantastically all around.
That's not a bad idea! In considering it, I've remembered one of the other issues I had with a blog: the infinite possibility space of what to write about was crushing. I felt like I could never get started. With commenting here, there's plenty that I can respond to, so not only is finding something to write about easier, but it also usually ends up more focused and targeted.
My comments often do become their own sort of articles in and of themselves, so I could easily post them as their own standalone topics instead. On the other hand, I do often like that they're "in context" of a larger discussion versus being on their own. I'd be curious to see what the community thinks about it, particularly @Deimos. Is it better that I keep doing what I'm doing with my lengthier comments (like the one upthread), or would I be better off posting them as their own topics? I can see advantages and disadvantages to both.
Also, thank you for the very kind words, LukeZaz. They warmed my heart.
I've mentioned it vaguely a couple of times before, but I think it would be interesting to try having a group like ~blog where people can just post about whatever they want as text posts. It would be kind of like letting people host a blog on Tildes—there's good text formatting, a commenting system, etc.
I think we need some better capabilities for being able to select or filter topics for it to work well though. People will probably want to be able to subscribe to only certain users' ~blog posts, or filter some users out, and there's not currently a good way to do that.
If you don't mind me inquiring, what do your parents watch/read for news sources?
I genuinely don't know. It's been so long since I've lived with them I have no idea what their habits are, and when we're together we don't spend time watching/reading the news.
I do know that they dislike Fox News. When I was a lot younger I would see parents watching it at my friends' houses, but we never had it on in ours.
My mom doesn't strike me as someone who follows news regularly in general, though she's certainly aware of major events. The only big social media account she uses is Pinterest. My dad regularly read the newspaper growing up and has shifted to reading digital news on his iPad. He doesn't use social media at all, and I believe he mostly reads CNN and The Wall Street Journal from their apps, but again, I could be completely wrong on this.
I haven't followed the news too much (from Europe), I just watched the NYT video on the murder and it's one of most disgusting thing I've seen (and I recently watched a documentary about the siege of Aleppo). I understand the outrage.
From the things I've seen on twitter I don't understand how anybody could think that the cops aren't the bad guys. They are obviously the ones escalating this situation, even doing things that if done in war would easily be war crimes. It's crazy.
I want to go out and protest, but as somebody who has only really done like 2 "protests" in my life (a walkout in high school and pride parade last year) I don't know how to convince my friends to go or where to find the location of good protests to go to. I know there is a map on the blacklivesmatters ccard, but they seem to be just cities and not any more info.
To me it seems like if you go out and protest, you are feeding your body to the machine, helping perpetuate the cycle of violence by putting yourself in harm's way. People get crazy at times like this and it's better to avoid the crazy ones until they calm down.
There are times to take a risk for a good cause, but when the point has been made over and over in dozens of cities, more of that isn't going to increase awareness any. We don't need more examples.
Are you saying that all the protests should stop? The protests are not just about raising awareness, but to sustain that awareness. Nothing has really been done to change the system that allows this to keep happening and I think that keeping the pressure up until something is done is important.
The storm of protests probably will stop. There will still be some, but they'll get smaller and happen in fewer cities going forward. Americans never stand up long enough to pull things together, that's their weakness.
Once the economic sickness really sets in with half the country unable to find work and no more bailouts, we'll get protests of a different kind. Those will continue until the situation is resolved.
So because there might be change in the future we shouldn't do anything now? Also, those are two separate issues. You are literally telling me to sit down and not protest then telling me that Americans can't stay passionate enough to change anything. Pessimism is used by people in power to stop the oppressed having hope for change, and what you are saying here is just supporting the racist and abusive people in power.
All I'm saying is that most people haven't got more than a week's worth of protesting in them in the best possible case scenario. Protest all you like, but expect to see the crowds thinning out. It's already started.
I don't like that it does, but it always does. I'd like the protests to go until they grind things to a halt so we get effective change. They never do, and I see no reason this time will be any different.
I understand your point, but I think this might go slightly different this time, on account of there are so many folks out of a job so they have nothing else to do.
I hope you're right. If it doesn't play out differently this time I'll be left wondering what it'll take.
For the most part I agree with what you are saying that people have short attention spans and it will cool off as people who don't care as much get tired of it, but I don't agree that we shouldn't try. You are saying that you don't see any reason this time will be different, but it sounds like you are saying it is not worth it to try to make it different this time.
Oh, it's worth it. I've just never had much luck convincing people of that. Right now LA is kicking ass, check out how much the crowds have grown even just since yesterday. That's what I'd like to see. It's no coincidence the protests that are sticking around and growing are in major cities with the worst police issues. We're not going to break the record set earlier in the week of 140+ cities protesting at once, though. That wave crested.
I don't live in a city where I could just make it part of my day. I need to drive almost two hours to get to the nearest active protest, and that isn't even in my state, it's in PA. Seems a bit disingenuous for me to join that protest, no? If I wanted to do in-state it's more like three hours (NYC). That's not something I can just slot into my schedule without problems.
The smaller cities near me (60k people) never even had a single protest or any looting - we don't have this police brutality issue. The local population being 97% white probably has something to do with that. We have the meth/heroin problem instead.
I live right outside of philadelphia, so I guess it makes more sense for me to go protest than for you to go protest. It is also an issue I have witnessed first hand, and as a member of the lgbt community and human race I feel it is my duty to support these causes for equality.
The protests aren't the point, though. They are (or should be) means to an end.
The prosecutors in Minneapolis aren't going to stop just because protests stop.
Perhaps some legislation might lose momentum but I don't think they're going to forget all this too quickly.
You'll have my vote in November. That's the best I can offer.
I'm cynical enough to think they'll still try to sweep this under the rug or pass toothless reforms. I wouldn't hope for real progress on this issue with Trump in the white house or with the existing enablers that support this mess still in office. Once they get voted out things will improve.
In the final analysis, this protest will catalyze a massive exodus of incumbents from office. It's close enough to an election for it to make a big difference, people will remember when they vote. Then we can get the necessary federal reforms to match up with the state/local reforms. Probably get it done in the first couple of sessions.
It seems like things are happening? All four cops got charged in Minneapolis. In Colorado the legislature is going to do something about independent monitoring.
Edit: I didn't find much else but here's an overview of legislative action due to Black Lives Matter
Those things won't instill lasting change. Until the system has been completely replaced police brutality will keep happening and systemic racism will continue to be an issue that effects everyone all the time.
Uh, how much protesting do you think it would take for the system to be completely replaced? Is that a realistic goal?
There is one city I know of where the police force was completely replaced: Camden NJ. It seems to have worked out? Maybe other cities should do that too but I don't know which ones.
I don't think it is at all a possible outcome, but I think that it should be (and is for many) the goal. I think that really anything short of that won't help as much as many people think it will, and seeing what needs to be done will inspire greater change than arrests for a small small subset of crimes committed by police.
In more positive news, Ferguson MO not only elected it's first black mayor she's also their first woman mayor.
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/03/868512501/ella-jones-elected-first-black-mayor-of-ferguson-mo
The Hill just shared this short clip from DC.
We need more of this. Clips like this shut down that 'everyone's a rioter' nonsense instantly.
Many Christians loved Trump's stunt at the St. John church because they see their faith as something to be enforced on others
Tldr; a lot of Republicans wouldn't mind a theocracy. Why the hell do these people care so little about liberal democracy?
SF is lifting it's curfew starting tomorrow morning
Today felt like a day that I needed some humor. Here's some links that you may find amusing.
https://twitter.com/lilestaban/status/1267666908633055233
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/376370022404325376/717769064914878474/LUrCrri.png
https://www.theonion.com/police-defend-use-of-non-lethal-rubber-tires-on-protest-1843884282
https://politics.theonion.com/democratic-leaders-announce-that-they-ve-learned-the-wo-1843882322
https://i.redd.it/36w4bpcxbp251.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZieKRnXYAAD9tA.jpg
From The Atlantic - Trump Gave Police Permission To Be Brutal. A pretty good opinion piece on Trump's claim to law and order.
America Is Unified Only in Its Outrage
[...]
I hate these, "Ain't it weird we're all worried about the wrong thing?" stories by detached journalist or blogger. The nursing home numbers are abhorrent, but at the very least, we have some degree of agency over that one, lawsuits will be had and changes can be made, or they will go bankrupt. There isn't a real equivalent for systemic injustice, and that's why it all comes out at once.
Lawsuits won't bring back the dead. And isn't it strange that nobody gets all that excited about it? I see more outrage here about astronomy.
No, it isn't strange at all if you take a second to think about the situation more than just at the bare surface level (i.e. 100k deaths vs 1 death). The reason you don't see as much large-scale outrage over coronavirus deaths is because people have not totally lost faith in the systems and institutions in place to address the issues related to that, now that those issues have come to light. But police brutality and the police killing innocent black people just keeps fucking happening all over the damn country, and despite all the blatant evidence of it happening very little seems to change, and cops continue to walk free afterwards time and time again.... so people have totally lost faith in the policing institutions and justice system. This protest isn't just about the death of George Floyd.
Edited to remove some heated word. Sorry for that, but your comments here (and elsewhere about the protests) seriously pissed me off and I initially acted too much out of anger.