Banjo Hangout Logo
Banjo Hangout Logo

Premier Sponsors

403
Banjo Lovers Online


Words matter, now more than ever

Want to hide these Google ads? Join the Players Union!

Page: 1  2   3   4  ...   Next Page   Last Page (5) 

Jun 4, 2020 - 9:38:55 AM
like this
9928 posts since 2/22/2007

In the storm of comments from all quarters about our current social crisis, please pay attention to the exact words used. See if the actions of an individual, or a group, qualify them as being labeled "protesters" or "looters" or "rioters". And when a source repeatedly uses the wrong term, then ask yourself "why?".
Here is a handy guide:
protesters march, chant, shout, sing, give speeches, carry signs, stand as public witness to injustice.
rioters smash things, burn things, initiate crowd violence, harm random strangers.
looters steal things from smashed storefronts during a riot.
That should be simple enough for any journalist or politician, and yet -----------

Jun 4, 2020 - 10:34:59 AM
likes this

3425 posts since 7/8/2010

Bill. Good food for thought. I never thought I would see this type of behavior so widespread.

Jun 4, 2020 - 11:17:06 AM

chuckv97

Canada

50113 posts since 10/5/2013
Online Now

Not sure what you’re getting at, Bill. How are they being confused, in a deliberate way? (I haven't been following the news much)

Edited by - chuckv97 on 06/04/2020 11:18:32

Jun 4, 2020 - 11:30:21 AM
like this

1172 posts since 2/4/2013

Reads as over simplistic to me. Rioters are often protesters as well, perhaps provoked protesters, perhaps just angrier protesters. Sometimes riot leads to rebellion which may lead to change or even the formation of new countries.

Jun 4, 2020 - 11:48:45 AM

Tobus

USA

2283 posts since 11/17/2015

quote:
Originally posted by GrahamHawker

Reads as over simplistic to me. Rioters are often protesters as well, perhaps provoked protesters, perhaps just angrier protesters. Sometimes riot leads to rebellion which may lead to change or even the formation of new countries.


We Americans know that all too well.  We were a nation born from riots.  And we shouldn't kid ourselves about our history, either.  All the stuff that the rioters are doing today which makes us angry would be considered child's play compared to what the colonial "patriots" did in the early-to-mid 1700s leading up to the American Revolution.  The rioters today aren't dragging politicians and tax collectors out into the streets to beat them or tar & feather them.  (Side note: people really need to look up tarring & feathering.  It was a very painful thing that a lot of people died from.)  Many of the grievances heard by today's rioters were the same grievances of colonials.  Inequality, abuse of power, lack of rights, etc.

It's just sort of funny how the tables have turned.  Not that I'm condoning the riots; I'm not.  In fact, I really wonder if I were alive in the middle of the 18th century, whether I would have been in favor of quelling the riots from those pesky colonials.  It's easy to support protestors and rioters who are righteous in their cause ...up until it's YOUR stuff getting burned. 

Edited by - Tobus on 06/04/2020 11:50:38

Jun 4, 2020 - 11:52:50 AM
like this

261 posts since 4/27/2020

Here's my handy guide.

With all due respect - and I TRULY mean that - anyone who refers to the current social unrest as "the apocalypse" is not going to be one of my sources of vetted and unbiased information.

Hopefully I've provided food for thought, and not offended.

Edited by - reubenstump on 06/04/2020 11:53:45

Jun 4, 2020 - 11:58:04 AM
like this

9928 posts since 2/22/2007

Yes Graham, definitions do tend to be simplistic. They state the plain meaning of words without sophistry. The people setting fires to buildings or smashing windows and stealing a handful of cell phones or sneakers from a neighborhood store are not "protesters", and certainly not "peaceful protesters". They are rioters and looters. One is a constitutionally protected activity that I defend and respect and the other is plain criminal behavior that cannot be excused or justified, though many are trying to do just that right now.
I agree that this is a very simple concept to grasp, and so all those deliberately misusing these terms are in fact advocating for lawless violent anarchy.

Jun 4, 2020 - 12:07:02 PM
like this

9928 posts since 2/22/2007

No offense at all, Lorenzo. My use of the term reflected how I felt as I sat on my balcony and watched my beloved town get torn apart. It was something that I never thought that I would see here and it felt, and sounded, like the end of the world at the moment. I agree regarding definitions that in that case I was being more emotional than factual.

Jun 4, 2020 - 12:13:36 PM

2968 posts since 9/12/2016
Online Now

So much of the time It is not what is said ,but how it is said. A lot of folks especially bible thumpers have been shouting the end is near . I am going to have to side with that "anyone" on that Reuben . That was one hell of a good thread wrong name or not . for you Sweating the small stuff comes to mind. Hang around throw some more thoughts out ,please

Jun 4, 2020 - 12:22:24 PM
like this

2968 posts since 9/12/2016
Online Now

one person can be all three

Jun 4, 2020 - 12:27:01 PM

261 posts since 4/27/2020

quote:
Originally posted by banjo bill-e

No offense at all, Lorenzo. My use of the term reflected how I felt as I sat on my balcony and watched my beloved town get torn apart. It was something that I never thought that I would see here and it felt, and sounded, like the end of the world at the moment. I agree regarding definitions that in that case I was being more emotional than factual.


It's easy to get caught up in the moment.  Emotions take the place of reason.  Protests become riots.  Even in normally rational people.

We just need to climb down sometimes, walk it back down.  Maybe take a knee.

One technique I've used over the years is to try to view a situation as a third party.  Not through the eyes of the other (second) party (putting myself in their shoes, looking at it from their viewpoint), but as a disinterested and neutral third party, viewing the situation and the participants from afar, without prejudice or preference.

It's not easy.  In fact, it's quite difficult - one has to overcome one's own deeply ingrained prejudices and experience.  But even when I fail, I gain a wider perspective.

To me, the racism here and around the world is obvious - I've seen it in foreign countries as well.  But, sad to say, racism is only one form of prejudice.  Prejudice and discrimination can be based on many factors - race, religion, tribe, sect, education, money, etc.  Look at Northern Ireland.  Look at Catholics and Protestants.  Look at Sunnis and Shiites.  Look at rich and poor.  The list goes on...

Edited by - reubenstump on 06/04/2020 12:30:13

Jun 4, 2020 - 12:37:28 PM
like this

261 posts since 4/27/2020

quote:
Originally posted by Tractor1

So much of the time It is not what is said ,but how it is said.


You're looking at it solely from the point of view of the sender.  You need to look it from the point of view of the recipient as well.

How is it heard and perceived?  You have to look at it not only from the point of view of the person who said it, how they said it, and how they meant it, but also from the point of view of the recipient.  What is their background, their experience?

If you play your banjo in an empty room, how well you play matters only to yourself.

If there are others in the room, their experience matters as well.

Edited by - reubenstump on 06/04/2020 12:51:57

Jun 4, 2020 - 1:01:04 PM

2968 posts since 9/12/2016
Online Now

true Reuben , that one is not so easy and sometimes impossible ,But i think I will ponder this ''outside looking in'' some .

Jun 4, 2020 - 1:02:50 PM

9928 posts since 2/22/2007

Lorenzo posted---"One technique I've used over the years is to try to view a situation as a third party. --"

Excellent. I have long maintained that all of us know what is right and what is wrong if we can just manage to view the situation as if we were viewing it as a disinterested bystander.

Jun 4, 2020 - 3:08:26 PM

2933 posts since 10/17/2009

quote:
Originally posted by banjo bill-e

In the storm of comments from all quarters about our current social crisis, please pay attention to the exact words used. See if the actions of an individual, or a group, qualify them as being labeled "protesters" or "looters" or "rioters". And when a source repeatedly uses the wrong term, then ask yourself "why?".
Here is a handy guide:
protesters march, chant, shout, sing, give speeches, carry signs, stand as public witness to injustice.
rioters smash things, burn things, initiate crowd violence, harm random strangers.
looters steal things from smashed storefronts during a riot.
That should be simple enough for any journalist or politician, and yet -----------


I agree. Some politicians and news focusing on only the rioting and looting, focus on destruction of property - (makes for good drama and TV) .  Thus some sipn to simplify, label all the protests as "riots" and thus dismiss all protesters are there to riot and loot. (often to give confirmation to what audience wants to hear) - Very little attention on what the actual protest is about. Makes it easier to thus diminish and silence such protests.

It is not as simple as that either/or to lump them all protests and protesters together.

Most are protesters; not rioting nor looting; nor is that the reason they are there. Vast majority of the arrests are for violating curfew or unlawful assembly. Of course that doesn't make great sensational news.

Many other politicians and journalists provide more of context, balance and complexity of the actual protests. They are not ignoring the rioting and looting, cover that quite extensively; but do not reduced to simple,confirmation sound bytes. They also include how various how different local governments/policing actions, choices they make; which in turn plays a part and can escalate the situation. Such as the events at Lafayette Square, on Monday.

Jun 4, 2020 - 4:04:08 PM
Players Union Member

rinemb

USA

12318 posts since 5/24/2005

Hmmm, so I am pondering. What if that third party observer were a "nihilist.". What would that entity be thinking? Brad

Jun 4, 2020 - 4:14:52 PM

261 posts since 4/27/2020

I'll agree with Mike. Focusing on the protests only looks at the effect. It totally bypasses the cause.

Jun 4, 2020 - 4:20:47 PM
likes this

donc

Canada

6329 posts since 2/9/2010

The one that aggravates me the most is a protest group being labeled as "right wing" or "left wing". If it was as simple as that we would all be in deep irreversible trouble.

Edited by - donc on 06/04/2020 16:22:42

Jun 4, 2020 - 4:20:54 PM
like this

9928 posts since 2/22/2007

That is the point, Mike. It's not just "semantics". There is a very important distinction to be made. Rioters and looters are not protesters. I have several videos which I can't post here, all showing black residents of the affected neighborhoods screaming at the white vandals destroying THEIR neighborhoods. Black businessmen's life savings destroyed, disabled black woman crying because the rioters destroyed every store in her neighborhood that she could reach by wheelchair. A black man taking spray paint away from skatepunks, lecturing them how they are only causing problems for Black people. Black woman cursing rioters that they are only making life worse for the black people that live there, while the entitled young white posers get to go back to their comfy digs and celebrate their "bravery". Unlike the media I am distinguishing between protesters and rioters. The great majority of the rioters are WHITE. The great majority of those who will have to live with the aftermath are poor Blacks. Once again you don't know what you are talking about and just give the knee-jerk response that was handed you by the very media who are deliberately distorting the issue. Good grief indeed.

Jun 4, 2020 - 4:36:08 PM

2968 posts since 9/12/2016
Online Now

What irks me right or wrong is beating around the bush,to say something. It happens a lot on these forums , a lot of times ----vague on purpose .Sometimes from an a&% that tops some snide remark off with a " just sayin" when they jump into a discussion to attack.
Not ignoring evil things and addressing them -----does not make them go away forever and ever .not on this planet. As in the other thread ,I personally give someone's thoughts credence when they give detailed fixes for the problem they have put forward .Generalizations feel good but that is about it.

Jun 4, 2020 - 10:12:52 PM
likes this

10197 posts since 1/15/2005

quote:
Originally posted by Tobus
quote:
Originally posted by GrahamHawker

Reads as over simplistic to me. Rioters are often protesters as well, perhaps provoked protesters, perhaps just angrier protesters. Sometimes riot leads to rebellion which may lead to change or even the formation of new countries.


We Americans know that all too well.  We were a nation born from riots.  And we shouldn't kid ourselves about our history, either.  All the stuff that the rioters are doing today which makes us angry would be considered child's play compared to what the colonial "patriots" did in the early-to-mid 1700s leading up to the American Revolution.  The rioters today aren't dragging politicians and tax collectors out into the streets to beat them or tar & feather them.  (Side note: people really need to look up tarring & feathering.  It was a very painful thing that a lot of people died from.)  Many of the grievances heard by today's rioters were the same grievances of colonials.  Inequality, abuse of power, lack of rights, etc.

It's just sort of funny how the tables have turned.  Not that I'm condoning the riots; I'm not.  In fact, I really wonder if I were alive in the middle of the 18th century, whether I would have been in favor of quelling the riots from those pesky colonials.  It's easy to support protestors and rioters who are righteous in their cause ...up until it's YOUR stuff getting burned. 


Tobin, at least the rioters that you described were directing their anger at the people who were responsible for their grief.  Rioters throwing stones through the windows and looting a bar owned by a retired minority firefighter is not exactly the same thing.  Of course you know that and are not implying that they are the same.  

Jun 5, 2020 - 2:50:18 AM
likes this

2708 posts since 4/29/2012

Bill has now started two threads on the current civil unrest in the US. Both of them are very firmly about anything BUT the reason why people are taking to the streets. One could almost think that this is a conscious diversionary tactic.
ANY human activity with a possibility of irresponsibility or danger is going to be done irresponsibly and dangerously by a small minority. "Look at all of those drivers - Bunch of drunks, tailgaters, speed-freaks. Let's kill all the drivers".

Jun 5, 2020 - 3:41:30 AM
likes this

figmo59

USA

31325 posts since 3/5/2008

People have a right to protest...
People do not have a right to destroy privet or public property..
People do not have the right to beat people n mame them over a disagreement...

The Riot behaviour n looting is wrong..plain n simple...

Jun 5, 2020 - 3:58:18 AM
like this

banjoy

USA

8905 posts since 7/1/2006

At least twice in this thread Bill has stated definitively that those in media and politics who mis-use the terms are doing so deliberately. I'm sure that may be true for some. Does it occur to you, Bill, that some in media and politics are ignorant, inexperienced or are simply out of their league, and therefore it may not be deliberate or nefarious as you suggest with such certainty?

However, I agree these terms are thrown around willy-nilly, and Fox news is as guilty as them all in this respect. It's stunning, actually. MSNBC comes in 2nd or 3rd IMHO. I would even agree that some in media and politics are confusing these terms with intent.

But I too wonder why Bill has started these threads without even touching on underlying broader issues or pretending that nuance trumps what's right before your eyes. I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this.

And to figmo's point, I see no one in disagreement regarding what is okay and what is not okay for folks to do. I would simply extend those truisms to include the police state that has evolved under our noses. So, it is NOT okay for the police to destroy personal property with impunity. It is NOT okay for police to brutalize citizens of any color with impunity. It is NOT okay for police to kill unarmed people of any color when there might be other methods of conflict resolution. Laws and moral mores should apply to everyone. Right?

And, finally, in this environment where we are told, repeatedly, "don't go by [name deleted's] words, go by his actions" ... it's a little disingenuous to hold those in lower levels of power and authority to a higher standard. Should this axiom you're proposing, also apply to everyone in media and politics, all the way up and down the line? Or just the select few you decide it applies to?

Edited by - banjoy on 06/05/2020 04:03:50

Jun 5, 2020 - 4:13:46 AM
like this

261 posts since 4/27/2020

quote:
Originally posted by banjoy

But I too wonder why Bill has started these threads without even touching on underlying broader issues or pretending that nuance trumps what's right before your eyes. I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this.

 

This.  Again - bypassing the cause to focus on the effect fails to address the underlying issue.  Real, tangible, long lasting improvement is accomplished by fixing the problem, not treating the symptoms.

Jun 5, 2020 - 4:29:52 AM
likes this

figmo59

USA

31325 posts since 3/5/2008

quote:
Originally posted by m06
quote:
Originally posted by figmo59

People have a right to protest...
People do not have a right to destroy privet or public property..
People do not have the right to beat people n mame them over a disagreement...

The Riot behaviour n looting is wrong..plain n simple...


Riot is a predictable and socially inevitable group response to unaddressed specific precipitating conditions of injustice and that injustice being ignored by the powerful and wider society in general.

Looting is wrong. But riot has a social and moral dynamic all it's own and those in positions of power determination whose intransigence and inaction cause the precipitating injustice to persist and remain a reality are equally culpable.

But sadly the fact that you associate rioting and looting as having the same source motivation suggests that truth and reality will fall on deaf ears.


Now you are dooin semantis Mike..

 

Riot = Violance...

Are you approving  of violance..?

 

Me thinks you might be conflating riot n war...

 

Well..mebee I am....

 

We may each see the meanings of words ...differntly..

 

I am plainly saying.. rioting...is wrong..

Looting is wrong...

You are making an unfounded leap...imo.. becose I lumped them both in one sentance..

Page: 1  2   3   4  ...   Next Page   Last Page (5) 

Hangout Network Help

View All Topics  |  View Categories

0.265625