top | item 25524203

(no title)

HexagonalKitten | 5 years ago

Many conservatives (that's how I'm labelled on here, so...) do not support the police as is. I've specifically witnessed more than one instance of absolutely treasonous behavior by police - threatening to hurt people and make up charges. It's counterproductive to think that only 'the left' is against bad police - nobody wants to pay people to ruin the system.

However, those people probably don't think that the police "committed acts of brutality against protestors", they likely see the videos of BLM peacefully protesting and police standing by, and Antifa committing arson and attacking police and police fighting back. (Portland, Chicago, Kenosha) And they think that fighting and arresting rioters is exactly what they pay police for.

> their enablers being too ignorant or too hateful to recognize the stupidity of the action and how 2020 has set them back decades in getting people to trust them.

You were talking about BLM here? Because "Breona" is just as fake as Jussie Smollet's story, and Jacob Blake would have been shot if he was white, etc. Watch the videos of woke white people in Portland shouting racist slurs at black cops to show how much they care about black people in general.

discuss

order

Jtsummers|5 years ago

Perhaps meditate on #48 from the linked article about keeping your identity small. You may find that you're less likely to assume that a comment that makes no mention of left/right or BLM is an attack on you personally so that you don't feel a need to defend yourself from an imagined attack.

HexagonalKitten|5 years ago

Right, because the issue of calling people 'enablers' of bad policing is generally so bipartisan that I'm coming from nowhere with my group labels... What's the # of the one about psychological projection?

I didn't dwell on my identity (because those aren't the words I'd choose to use if I had to). It was a way of self-disclosure like saying if you work for the company being discussed. It's to say "while I'm probably one of the people you're talking about ...".

> an attack on you personally so that you don't feel a need to defend yourself from an imagined attack.

Oh, no. You're out to left field. I'm explaining, not defending, everyone who tends to be misunderstood. I'm trying to say that people can support a thing without being 'enablers', and that two people who both see the same problems (police violence) can see different solutions.

I'm sharing my personal views to help explain how, regardless of labels, that most of our group hatreds are based on intentional (by others if not us) misstatements about the others, not their own words or actual views.