839

A recently released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document titled “Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide”* links common protest symbols to “terrorism” — another marker in a common theme of conflating militant protest for social justice with deadly terrorist violence within the United States. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Brennan Center have raised warnings about such documents, citing inadequate protections for people’s constitutional rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 111 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Protests are nice to look at, but they paint free targets on everyone who participates. Conservatism/fascism has never been defeated by pacifism.

If you are motivated to resist fascism/conservatism, arm yourself and train appropriately. Take classes, join left-leaning gun clubs, survival groups and prepper classes. Exercise and learn to fight.

Conservatives have been prepping for years for a war they insist is necessary. They have decided you are their enemy. You cannot change that by protesting.

[-] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 39 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

As a liberal gun owner, I agree.

I want a world without mass shootings.

But right now, the majority of mass shootings happen against the most vulnerable people. And the majority of hate crimes is happening because a bunch of fucktards are pushing violent messages. And the worst part is nobody in power really gives a shit.

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

When I was growing up in school there was only one mass shooting at the time and that was Columbine. Kids would drive to school with guns in their racks because they planned on hunting later. The notion to shoot people wasn't even a consideration. What we have isn't a gun issue, we have a mental health crisis like nothing we have seen before and we are far too unequipped to handle it. We need better mental health programs and ways for people to more easily use them from a young age.

[-] docAvid@midwest.social 19 points 2 years ago

The Columbine shooters did not use hunting guns. We have better access to mental health care than in the past. We also have greater access to more deadly guns. Countries with strong gun control do not have our problem with mass shootings. Implementing strong gun control has been proven to stop mass shootings. A lot of money has been spent by arms dealers to convince you the the problem is your fellow humans, and not the largely unregulated flow of machines of death supplied for capitalist profit.

Should we have better access to mental healthcare, and intervention programs? Sure. Funny, though, how the people insisting it's all about mental illness and not about the gun profiteers also usually oppose any public spending on mental healthcare as well.

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

I mean the problem is my fellow human. AI hasn't picked up a gun and shot up a school as far as I know.

I am for more efforts to provide mental health care for low income people's and it should be free.

There are attempts at brain washing on both sides depending on the agenda.

I can agree that military style fire arms do not need to be in the hands of ordinary civilians that haven't undergone training in weapon safety. I believe it should be required to have yearly training on weapon safety for all fire arms.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 18 points 2 years ago

There are attempts at brain washing on both sides depending on the agenda.

The problem with this "both sides" bullshit is that leftist critique is nearly always targeted at systems, as opposed to reactionary 'brainwashing' is targeted at minorities

A "radical leftist" isn't out to murder anyone, they're out to disrupt the system. As far as I'm concerned, the problem is almost entirely a reactionary politics problem, not a problem of firearm training and not even one of mental health (though they are contributing factors(

Don't conflate libratory movements with reactionary terrorism

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

I am honestly loving your take on the subject. It actually made me think a little about what you are saying and the fact you are very respectful in your wording is wonderful.

Can you explain reactionary brainwashing of minorities a bit further?

Many far leftists I have run into have been very controversial or just plain rude so having someone speak plainly and respectfully is a nice change of pace.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 11 points 2 years ago

I find your lack of irony refreshing, too.

I'm confused by your question though, can you clarify your choice of using the word 'of' in the question "brainwashing of minorities"?

It's so rare to run into a reactionary conservative that's so curious about left-leaning politics, thank you for your curiosity

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

I try to keep my perspective unbiased which is difficult because I am human after all. When conversing with someone that brings up interesting perspectives and does not devolve to name calling I try to speak with them further because those are the ones who's reasoning skills tend to be more developed and make for better conversations over all.

From how I understood what you were saying, there is a reactionary brainwashing of sorts. Perhaps I was incorrect in my belief that you meant of minorities specifically. I may have read it incorrectly.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 5 points 2 years ago

Thanks for acknowledging your imperfect interpretation.

I used scarequotes in the phrase you are referencing, perhaps that is where your confusion is stemming from? Brainwashing was used in your comment, I was simply making a reference to your usage.

The point: reactionary politics identifies the "outsider" as the subject of opposition. Radical leftist politics identifies oppressive systems as the subject of opposition.

Hence: the use of firearms by one group is simply not comparable to the use by the other.

Hopefully that clarifies things for you.

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Yes it does, I appreciate that. Thank you.

Would you agree that reactionary politics is highly based on raised emotions or high tension to the outsider? Or perhaps a lack of understanding? Or maybe a lack of depth in sight?

When identifying an oppressive system what are the markers of such a system? What qualifies as oppressive? Is it subjective to an individual or is there a science behind it?

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 7 points 2 years ago

Reactionary politics is less a coherent ideological framework and more a reflexive rejection of social change. It's almost by definition oriented against minority social groups.

Oppressive systems exist in all types, and there's a great deal of study that deals with it. If you're genuinely curious to learn more, I'm Foucault is who I am most familiar with and would recommend for anyone wanting to know more about structural analysis.

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

I appreciate that information. I will look into it. I appreciate your willingness to speak with me on these matters. It is always nice having civil conversations. I hope you have some wonderful days ahead and happy holidays.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

There are attempts at brain washing on both sides depending on the agenda.

Such as? Where is this (supposed) "leftist" brain-washing machine supposed to be at?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

we have a gun issue and a mental health issue.

There are a LOT of people in America that own, or have easy access to fire arms, that shouldnt be allowed within 2 miles of one.

[-] Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

This is an inadequate summation I am afraid. Most of the world right now is experiencing a mental health crisis. A lot of the countries with similar populations and cultures to the US with primarily English speaking approximations - Australia, UK, Canada and the nordic nations... All of them are experiencing massive mental health and economic issues on a systemic level. There is something unique to the United States... The guns. Not just the lack of public safety measures to control guns but the culture of entitlement to weaponry and maintaining the fantasy of utilizing them against other humans in some sort of nebulous future extralegal event when some sort of universal concensus is reached that war is declared on the US government by it's rag tag highly individualist citizenry.

Unfortunately you cannot divorce the mental health issue from the gun issue in the States but neither can you solve the issue without actually addressing that guns at that level of saturation are a nightmare that causes a unique presentation of crisis. Calling for it to be addressed strictly as a mental health issue will go no where... And it's designed to go no where because as long as we are having this debate of whether it's a gun or a mental health problem neither get addressed... And quite frankly there are simply not enough mental health professionals in the field to address that demand. The burnout rate is real amongst professionals.

There were also mass school shootings before Columbine. The Ecole' Polytechnique massacre for instance in Canada had 22 victims in 1989 and was committed with a semi automatic weapon and it spurred a massive surge in gun regulation and restrictions for automatic weapons and maximum clip size capacity. The US is unique in that it is the only country to experience these mass shootings and yet refuse any wide ranging gun control reforms at a federal level in response.

The problem also spills over borders. 85 percent of weapons found to be used to commit crimes in Canada have been traced to purchases made in the US.

[-] mob@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

I actually agree with what you are saying, but I don't believe it's so black and white. I also believe the media realized the profits in outrage and terror so that's why we are constantly hammered with it.. which is likely a contributing factor in mental health issues of the country/world.

Columbine was one of the biggest ones ever at the time and a media field day, but definitely not the only school shootings around that time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States_(before_2000)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago

Apartheid in South Africa was solved politically. The Troubles in Northern Ireland were solved politically. The Berlin wall collapsed and the Cold War ended without violence.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 27 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Nelson Mandela was accused of being a terrorist because he was one. The ANC mostly killed civilians, "civilians" that just so happened to be key figures in apartheid politics (well, that was their goal, anyways, and it worked well enough)

Also, just how myopic do you have to be to point to the collapse as the Soviet Union as being "solved politically" while ignoring several decades of proxy wars and an attempted coup?

Shit, it didn't even resolve that well other than independence for the satellite states, it just left Putin in charge in the end to get a million people killed himself.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Apartheid in South Africa was solved politically.

Bullshit. The Apartheid-regime would never have been ended if it wasn't for it's military defeat in Angola and the (extremely violent) uprising in South Africa itself.

The Troubles in Northern Ireland were solved politically.

Bullcrap. If it wasn't for the IRA, Ireland would still be England's doormat.

The Berlin wall collapsed and the Cold War ended without violence.

The (so-called) "Cold War" never ended... the US just switched to new pretexts to wage war on the 3rd world.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fungah@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

War is diplomacy when all other means have failed. The same is true for revolution and resistance id say.

Violence isn't the only resort. It's the last one. And often unnecessary. Though not always.

[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

"War is the continuation of policy with other means."

-Carl von Clausewitz

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

Each side has labeled the other as the enemy, it isn't just conservatives. It's just a way for the people in power to make the citizens waste their energy on each other rather than focus on the real enemy. Both the right and the left are just tools to sperate everyone. If the citizens are fighting each other then who's going to fight the corruption in our government?

[-] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 36 points 2 years ago

BoTh SiDeS

More enlightened centrism bullshit. Then difference is that one side wants people dead for who they were born as.

[-] mob@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

And the reality is that there really aren't these nicely defined "sides" for the majority of people.. but there is definitely large groups of people who chose their "team"

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] audiomodder 18 points 2 years ago

I’m trans. I was happy to view those on the right as “just people who I disagree with”…until they started pushing to eliminate people like me.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Voting is a better means of enacting change than protesting. If ethnonationalists control government and you try to actively resist then you get crushed. If liberal-progressives control government and they resist then they get crushed. Defend yourself to the fullest extent if the law but voting is more important than protesting. If the excrement hits the rotating assembly of air moving blades then you want those sympathetic to your ideals at the wheel not those hostile to your ideals. The three most important things in real estate is location, location, location and the three most important things in representative government is vote, vote, vote.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 7 points 2 years ago

Can we name the resistance Rainbow Riot?

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

hehehehehehehehehe

that would piss em off even more

[-] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago
[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 2 years ago

I'm not clear on what situation I'm supposed to anticipate in which shooting people is the preferred resolution.

[-] RiikkaTheIcePrincess@pawb.social 4 points 2 years ago

I hear they call it the "boogaloo."

[Sarcasm] Don't worry, though, there are plenty of minorities to sacrifice to appease them. [Very sarcasm with extra pointyness] If you just throw us all into a meat grinder for their amusement they'll surely never do anything bad!

this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
839 points (100.0% liked)

politics

25059 readers
2254 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS