If you are making assumptions based on their actions, and those assumptions are that these kids are racist, they must’ve performed some kind of action that you consider racist in nature. If they have, which action was it?1. I don't. I made assumptions and conjecture based on their actions. If they are proven not racist, I'll be the first in line to admit I was wrong and apologize.
How do you know they are not racist, and were not there to incite aggression?
2. Personally? I don't know. Nor have I made the statement that all cops are racist. Or that any of them are racist. My argument is that the POC in this situation are offended by the racist connotations that have been associated with the Blue Lives Matter banner.
Should the institution itself be proven to have either been built upon racist intent, or influenced by it in its current state, would you be willing to change your view?
3. You're absolutely right. And just as the white students were free to incite and engage, the students of color were free to harass (to fit both our sides of this perspective). At no point was anyone physically assaulted or threatened. We've already agreed (maybe not you in particular) in an earlier comment that things escalated.
You seem to misunderstand the point of the MCC. There's no segregation going on. It's free for white people to enter. It was designed to embrace all cultures, not specifically white peoples'. Maybe the one girl of color went a little overboard, but when triggered by agitators, well... at least it's legal, right?
I mention his skin color because it's relevant to the situation, and I don't know his name (also irrelevant. I don't know anyone else's names either, for the record). If the roles were reversed? It depends. If white people had been subjected to the same treatment POC have the past ~300 years, everything from discrimination, to systemic racism, to slavery, go on and so on, then yes, I'd be equally upset. My concern isn't skin deep, it's over the ethical treatment people have against each other based on deep rooted, abstract hatred.
I can safely assume that they are not racist because I have no reason to assume that they are - I haven’t seen any evidence of racism. In the absence of evidence pointing to guilt, I operate on the presumption of innocence, which is reasonable.
I can see that the people in the video are getting offended. I don’t care that they’re offended, we’ve been over this. Their feelings are not evidence of any wrong-doing on the part of the kid, it’s evidence of poor impulse control.
The institution of “the police” wasn’t built with the express intention of persecuting minorities - it was built with the intention of enforcing the law. The law was, at one point, racist, and by extension, enforcing it was also racist. This is no longer the case. I wouldn’t be willing to change my stance on the police based on past events because I live in the present. As much as I would like to be the next incarnation of Doctor Who, I’m afraid that I’m just a mere human.
You are never free to harass another person. In fact, that’s illegal.
The MCC clearly doesn’t embrace everyone, it’s on tape. You are right - things sure did escalate. As a side note, the word “assault” doesn’t entail physical contact - that’s “battery”. Badgering someone in a threatening manner in order to force them to act a certain way or do something specific, for instance leave a public space, can constitute assault. I’m not a judge, if the kid wants to sue then he’s welcome to do so, I’d consider that overreacting since little harm was done, if any. I’m not the “emotional distress” kind of guy.
Thank you for confirming that his skin colour plays a factor in your judgement of the events in the video. I’m afraid that the wrongs committed 300 years ago have no bearing on the present and the kid is in no way guilty of any of them. He’s just a guy with a sticker, in the present. If you take a step back and think about this with a cool head, you *might* be able to see that you are putting a whole lot of labels on the guy based on two things - “white police supporter = racist slaver” is not a reasonable train of thought.
EDIT: As a complete aside, am I the only one here who raises an eyebrow at the term “people of colour”? How is that anything other than calling someone “coloured” with extra steps? It’s so bizarre to me, you got rid of a slur just to replace it with another segregating term. The obvious term to use is just “people”, I don’t see how their complexion is relevant.
Last edited by Foxi4,