An open thread to discuss the shootings in Dallas. What’s been reported so far: 5 officers were killed and 6 others wounded when multiple shooters opened fire on police at a BlackLivesMatter protest in Dallas. Three suspects are in custody; a fourth reportedly killed himself during a standoff with police. The police say he was spouting apocalyptic rhetoric and claimed more police deaths were to come.
More details here.
Whoever the shooters are, whatever justifications they’ve cooked up, this is a massacre, an act of terrorism. Abusive cops need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But vigilante “justice” isn’t justice. These officers did not deserve this. Not only that, but the shootings will make it harder to fight the police abuses that have left so many innocent black men (and black boys, and black women) dead.
No trolls, no MRAs allowed in this thread. Anyone who justifies the shootings in any way, whether they’re sincere or a troll, will be banned and their comments will be deleted. Please email me to let me know if you see any inappropriate comments.
Littleknown does kind of have a point. Dehumanizing language just isn’t a good thing.
We don’t accept dehumanizing language about manospherians. Why should it be different for the police.
@ littleknown
You raise a lot of points and you’ve clearly put some thought into this. I’m afraid though I do have to disagree with you in regard to some of your ideas.
Your central thesis seems to be that matryrdom is somehow noble and effective; and that’s the only acceptable option for oppressed groups. You’re uncomfortable with the idea of oppressed groups using violence.
Well that’s fine, but the problem with pacifism is it nearly always comes from a perspective of absolute privilege. It’s very rarely the pacifists who face the danger.
I’m at a loss to think of any example where pacifism has actually lead to social change (It may be I’m just unaware; I’m happy to accept examples). People talk about Ghandi, but the fact is, that whilst we now talk about the salt gathering protests, at the time they had no effect whatsoever. The British just went in and cracked a few skulls, then things carried on as before. When the British finally left India it had nothing to do with Ghandi (“Quit India” was a spent force even in Indian politics by that stage). The main reasons were economic, we just couldn’t maintain an empire after nearly being bankrupted by the war, but another key factor was people like Jinnah pointing out that he had millions of men at arms who could force the issue.
I personally abhor what happened in Dallas, both for moral reasons and also because I think it will be counter-productive; but I can understand black people who raise an eyebrow when people in authority start to say how all the nation mourns for those particular deaths and something must be done.
You also talk about the dehumanising langauge and the fact that there are some good cops out there. I personally agree with you about the language. It’s the hyperbolic rhetoric that’s so common now, that leads to the murder of politicians. But at the same time I can’t condemn most people who use that. There will always be hotheads with no interest in the cause just trying to provoke a fight. But for the genuinely oppressed it’s hard to criticise them. As a white person living in England the police to me are nothing but good news. When I get pulled over for a traffic offence, a bit of a chat and a ‘sorry, won’t happen again’ and we part company as friends. It’s a a much different story for a black person who sees blue lights in his rear view mirror.
Let me ask you two questions:
What are your feelings when you see a police officer approach you?
What are your feelings when a strange man approaches you?
Does either encounter make you scared? Does your heart race? Do you start to wonder if you’re going to survive the encounter unscathed?
Now, as a white man, neither of those scenarios bother me. And we know there are many men who would scoff at a woman for feeling scared in the second scenario. At best your going to get into a #notallmen debate.
But are women being unreasonable in their fears? I would suggest not.
I would also suggest that a black person who fears for their safety in the first scenario isn’t being unreasonable and that a white person adopting a #notallpolice attitude can be equally as privilege blind as an MRA who goes down the #notallmen route.
I’m not having a dig. I’m sure you’re a kind and wonderful person and your pacifism comes from a good place. I hope though you understand why that view may not be for everybody; especially those people who actually have to suffer the consequences.
@littleknown
Sorry if you feel like this is dog piling but I’m gonna have to side with every one else here disagreeing with you in that it’s a false equivalency argument you’re making.
Cops have an entire power structure in place, the government, the law and overwhelming public support to keep them safe from harm whereas people of colour get nothing. Calling cops “pigs” is nowhere near the same as the violence and systematic oppression that minority groups get daily. Condemning anyone for “dehumanizing language” is laughable considering how disgustingly one sided the supposed race war is.
Also the fact that, yeah, claiming that the “moral high ground” should always be taken is a tough sell when people of colour are literally murdered for following instructions given to them (Philando Castile).
While violence is always deplorable it’s hardly unavoidable, especially when people feel like it’s the last resort available to them that’s a failing on the part of society, not on them for “giving up”. That being said, this Dallas shooting was not the way to go and I’ll be mourning the police officers killed like everyone else.
@littleknown
I agree with your comment about dehumanizing language and I’m grateful you brought this up.
@IP
Thanks for those Swedish points of view! It’s interesting what “left” and “right” mean in different countries.
*****
@Alan
Off the top of my head, Martin Luther King’s efforts helped to lead to civil rights legislation in the United States.
Also, I’ve never heard of feminist protests devolving into violence (although I’m sure that there were some incidents at abortion clinics, probably not started by feminists). And yet feminists have made significant gains in the past 40 years.
In particular, advocates to end domestic violence in the USA (probably in other countries too) worked with police to educate them on DV and how to respond to it. It’s made a positive difference!
And I’m certainly not a Gandhi scholar, but I have to believe that his efforts brought sympathetic attention to the issue of Indian independence. Without that, would events have played out differently? For example, might England have dug in its heels just because it could? I don’t know. But I have to consider that possibility.
*****
Finally, as a citizen of the USA, I want to say that I’m puzzled about gun culture too.
I didn’t grow up in a gun-loving culture.
I don’t have a gun, and I don’t want one.
With the exception of my grandfather’s rifles — all of them locked up — I’ve never seen a gun.
To the Rest of the World: Please don’t think that we’re all armed to the teeth!
@ kat
Ha, I should have guessed you’d be the person who could educate me 🙂
Even the civil rights thing though is complicated. MLK was obviously a major icon in that struggle; but how big a part did other factors play? The Black Panthers? President Johnson cashing in on JFK’s legacy? Politicians vying for the black vote?
It’s also a fact that a lot, if not most, of the major players in the struggle for black peoples’ rights ended up being murdered. I can understand a black person wondering “Is there any way we can advance the struggle that doesn’t involve us getting shot?”
And whilst civil rights legislation is important; how much has the realty for black people on the ground changed? Women have total equality before the law; but feminists rightly scoff when MRAs say women therefore have nothing to complain about.
Like I say, I personally abhor what’s happened on Dallas, and you know I’m not a fan of confrontational politics generally*; but I’m very conscious that I hold that view in my own very comfortable straight white guy bubble.
To touch briefly on your other points, well, you know I’m also a big fan of Edith Garrud* 🙂
As for Ghandi, a lot of people at the time agreed with Churchill’s description of him as a “jumped up Middle Templar” (even though he was actually a member of Inner Temple). Counter factuals are fun, but by definition speculative. I’m not sure what would have happened with India but for WW2.
[* I’m aware of my inconsistency on this issue and that I apply different standards to different causes. I suspect we all do that though]
@ rubyyogi
Thanks. The story was upsetting to read. Thankfully no one was killed.
Also, it’s not surprising that there’s tension in Tennessee. A couple of years back, a student from UT Knoxville was not resisting arrest. And yet, he was knocked out via a chokehold by a cop. Because, the cop claimed, the student was resisting arrest.
A link in the article you shared, “Tensions High in Nashville“, quotes BLM protesters discussing the militarization of Tennessee’s police forces.
Violence by or against cops isn’t helping anyone. I really hope that something like what happened in Dallas doesn’t also happen in Nashville or any other Tennessee city, too.
@ Valentine
GeekAesthete’s explanation is very good.
Did you see what Obama had to say about the “blue lives matter” and “black lives matter” discussions? It’s quite good.
Meanwhile, a former Congressman and some police groups are blaming Obama for Dallas. The Congressman, Joe Walsh, calls on “Real America” to get out and “defend our cops”.
Like I said in my previous post, some people really do think that BLM, Loretta Lynch, President Obama are part of a massive conspiracy working together to destroy “real” America and kill cops.
I think I comment here once every two years or something.
@littleknown
Frankly, you should know better your own history, you know. Martin Luther Kind even owned weapons since he was a fan of reasonable defense. This article is a good introduction despite being on a comedy website.
@ the general thread
Since there’s being an influx of stuff in how the news around the world are covering the whole Dallas, thing, I thought I could share how the news in my country are covering it.
I’m from Panama.
In general, the articles tend to be relatively short, or used as fillers, and sympathetic (we are a deeply empathetic people and I’m sure the US citizens who have friends here are being rolled up in blankets and showered in well wishes and warm food, but otherwise we are pretty blasé).
There’s no distinction between left and right in coverage, nor is there any deeper commentary into what happened inthe US (although today things could change), because we simply can’t muster enough interest because that is the sort of thing we expect.
From the major newspapers of the country:
La Estrella de Panamá:
http://laestrella.com.pa/internacional/america/eeuu-luto-tras-matanza-policias-dallas-texas/23949950
http://laestrella.com.pa/internacional/america/ascienden-5-policias-muertos-matanza-dallas-eeuu/23949782
La Prensa:
http://www.prensa.com/mundo/policias-muertos-tiros-protesta-Dallas_0_4523547753.html
http://www.prensa.com/in_english/Muere-sospechoso-balacera-Dallas-muertos_21_4524507505.html
It’s interesting to note how the language in the different newspapers differ. La Prensa’s articles are much more dry and informative, and short on a sympathetic vein, since they were bought from APA and stuff and then suited to their format. La Estrella, which actually sends journalists to the place where stuff is happening (as it did on this case), is much “warmer” towards people in general.
(There is another major newspaper, but given that is owned by our fugitive of an ex-president, I won’t even link to that).
I wish I had some news clips to post. There you see the starker contrast. A lot of international news are given preeminence when they deal with tragedies, in order to milk Panamanian sentimentality (it’s good business!!), but the time allocated to dispense that sentimentality says volumes. Syria gets mentions every day, and usually is about a three minute blurb to bemoan the fate of the civilians. Dallas news are also updated every day, but I think only the first day had a one minute something seconds of coverage, since the general sentiment of the population is “poor cops, poor families, we’ll say some prayers—also, another gun massacre in the States, as expected”.
So that’s what been happening.
Ohlmann: if the US were reduced to using spoons to murder each other, there’d be a lot less murder. Diamond would be shooting a video going “officer don’t tell me you just did this” and her boyfriend would be looking kind of bemused and annoyed at having just been thwacked by a wood spoon for no reason whatsoever — a huge improvement over sitting moaning and bleeding to death.
I keep seeing reference to multiple shooters on this thread. It’s one shooter. Afghanistan veteran, sent home for sexual harassment, but somehow given an honorable discharge anyway. Fan of Internet hate groups that mirror the white supremacist groups.
I’m surprised how rare this is actually. Black man shot by police is a daily event; police shot by black man not so much.
I still think there’s a lot of white feminism going on in here. Pig is not even that strong of an insult. Can we not tell people that name calling is too far when they’re literally being murdered, not to mention constantly harassed and way disproportionately arrested, convicted, and imprisoned for non-violent drug crimes that white people commit just as often. We call MRAs names all the time. Because misogyny makes us angry. It’s disappointing to me that so many people are dismissing the very legitimate anger people have at the police here.
On the blue lives matter thing, it reminds me of all that support our troops rhetoric and paraphernalia was going around during invasion of Iraq. It’s hollow and shallow and has nothing to do with caring about anyone’s life. It has everything to do with spinning state violence as the moral good and those who oppose it as the unpatriotic degenerates. Opposing the war meant you must want our troops to die. Opposing police brutality must mean you want cops to die. Notice how the support our troops signs and stickers went away when support for the occupation of Iraq did? This despite all the problems that veterans often have. Problems that haven’t magically disappeared.
@wwth
Maybe I should make it clear that I have no problem with name-calling, and I have not dismissed anger directed at the police force. I am also angry with the police.
While I do believe some have been guilty of dehumanization of cops, dehumanization of PoC is obviously a much, much, much bigger problem in society.
I like how Obama put it. I mean, if the vet clinic where I work decided to try to get more people to bring their cats in regularly (in general, cats are less likely to get regular care), and used the slogan “Cats Matter”, that does not translate as “Dogs Suck”. It just means that the message emphasizes a population that is not being treated equally, in an attempt to equalize treatment.
@Ledasmom
Isn’t it amazing how such a simple point can be so impossible for conservatives to understand?
Oh, and pig isn’t even used that commonly used anymore. It’s not a BLM term. It’s what – mostly white – hippies used in the 60s. I’m not sure if that’s where it originated, but that’s where it got popular. Yet, I’ve never once seen anyone here or any other feminist type site bring it up as something problematic. Nor did its use lead to a wave of violence against police. But all of a sudden it’s dehumanizing?
None, of us can escape that our culture is racist. Even when we do our best not to be racist, some of it is going to seep into our brains. We are socialized to see black anger as scary and violent. I think that’s what this is.
@Bryce
Yeah, fuck that noise. I don’t want people so deterred ‘protecting and serving’ me. The police are 1 of the more well respected institutions in this country (56% approval), and we Muricans hate our institutions (Congress 9%). The majority is on their side, plenty who aren’t on their side don’t say anything, and the tiny minority who both dislike cops and make their dislike known are enough to convince ‘good’ people not to join? I’ll reiterate, fuck em, they don’t deserve the badge
So…nobody has anything to say about littleknown’s pat characterization of Malcolm X as having a “philosophy of violence”?
Not cool, Mammothers. Not. Cool.
@ axe
At the risk of drawing a clumsy parallel, this reminds me of the “I’m a nice guy but c*nts won’t date me; so now I’m going to be a douchebag” thing.
@Alan
I agree. It’s definitely complicated. But I think that MLK helped to make civil rights a good thing in the minds of many people. Or at the very least, a less bad thing than if only those willing to use violence were leading the struggle. If the latter were the case, I think that it would have been a much harder sell to the US public.
It was a dangerous job. Only the very, very most dedicated were consciously willing to take it on.
The woman who taught other suffragettes jiu-jitsu and helped to stage escapes and rescues from the police? (I had to look up the details again — she was unknown to me until you mentioned her a while back.)
Although these were dangerous tactics, it seems that these suffragettes confined themselves to defensive moves. And yeah, under other circumstances, a person trying that could end up dead.
I had to look up the meaning of Churchill’s entire (British English) description of Gandhi! Yes, he was in a way an insider, with a certain amount of power. But so are many people who advocate revolution. (MLK was a minister.) I think that being on the inside, to whatever extent they are on the inside, might make them even more determined revolutionaries. They see how the mechanics of oppression work — and they have some ideas about how to end it.
*****************
My local Pacifica network radio station (founded in 1949 by US poet-pacifist Lew Hill, his wife, and his friends from the conscientious objectors work camp where they were detained during WWII) ran a program a while back about the civil rights movement. According to this program, Malcolm X (well known as a foe of pacifism) showed up in Washington, DC, during the March on Washington (1963). Such a large gathering of black people had never before been attempted, and even the organizers were worried that violence would erupt. Malcolm X sent a message to MLK: If there’s trouble, call me. I’ll calm the crowd.
The world saw Malcolm and MLK’s approaches as diametrically opposed, but the truth seems to be more baroque.
****************
One thing I’ve learned about pacifism (from a member of the War Resisters League) is that you don’t need to be an absolute pacifist to be a pacifist. You can oppose violence in some circumstances but not in others and still call yourself a pacifist. Good thing, because the world is complex.
@Numerobis : the NRA and republicains aren’t, strictly speaking, wrong, when saying that outlaws will find a way to get a weapon. Nobody can enforce a gun ban so strict that litteraly will have a gun.
That’s where a gun ban will help, but won’t suffice. Less gun mean less impulse suicide and less shooting overall, but it’s also very much a question of culture. It’s wishful thinking to think that banning guns will be enough.
If you want a parallel, the Prohibition will do alright. It did lower alcohol consumption, but strangely it was far from removing the problem altogether. That’s both because cops weren’t super keen on enforcing that, and because people who wanted alcohol found a way.
In a similar way, it’s not terribly useful to confiscate all gun. It need to be coupled with making people not want guns.
@ledasmom
I love this! Hope you don’t mind if I steal it.
I wish that people considered the lives Aiyana Stanley Jones or Alton Sterling to be worth really mourning as a nation. I wish their killers were immediately arrested, tried, and jailed. And thats all I wanna say about the Dallas shootings.
Ohlmann: are you an engineer?
@kale
Well said!