Conflict erupts at Minneapolis, L.A. protests over George Floyd death

[mr friendly guy]

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/p ... d-protests

Photojournalist blinded by police during George Floyd protests

A photojournalist covering the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis has been left permanently blinded in one eye after being shot in the face with a rubber bullet by police.

Bet you Human Rights Watch is going to be silent.

[loomer]

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/p ... d-protests

Photojournalist blinded by police during George Floyd protests

A photojournalist covering the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis has been left permanently blinded in one eye after being shot in the face with a rubber bullet by police.

Bet you Human Rights Watch is going to be silent.

She's an absolute boss. "My job is to witness and they only got my left eye. My right one is good to go."

[Mr Bean]

There's very little actual evidence of 'outside agitators'. It's a standard piece of propaganda used to discredit uprisings by Black America, and less frequently, other violent riots. So yes - it's concerning. Not because of sinister anarchists from out of state (oh, the power we supposedly hold. If a few anarchists turning up could incite a national crisis, don't you think we'd have done that at every opportunity?) but because the establishment is promulgating a conspiracy theory that legitimizes the use of excessive force to 'defend our cities' from 'outside interference'.

They tried the same line in Ferguson. It was inaccurate then, and it's inaccurate now.

Except, of course, for those arrested who, when identified, are found to actually be from outside the state.

It's not unknown for government or private interests to send people into protests to stir up trouble, there's just as long a history of that as "outside agitators" being made-up bullshit. There was video of a guy methodically smashing windows at an Autozone in Minneapolis believed by many to be a police officer sent out to give the rest of the police a pretext for harsher methods - which would, in fact, be an "outside agitator" not from outside the state but from outside the actual protestors. There are also whacko groups in the US interested in instigating violence and/or race war who have, in fact, turned up at other demonstrations with the intention of causing trouble. Why is it beyond belief that they might be involved here, too?

Absolutely we have to be on guard against big authority framing the argument in their own favor, or outright lying. That doesn't mean outside provocateurs can't or don't happen.

Bluntly, there is a distinction between the agent provocateurs deployed by the police and the right and the 'outside agitators' claimed by the establishment. The establishment creates the appearance of outside agitation to discredit the legitimacy of the uprising, pure and simple, and it is for this reason that we must not dignify Barr et al's claims of 'outside agitators' even in the context of police undercovers.

So when we say 'this is not the work of outside agitators', it is not to say 'there are zero people who are not 100% part of the community involved in this riot'. It is a way of saying 'no, fuck off and take your framejob bullshit elsewhere'. We all know there's police undercovers and rightists who start shit. There always are, and they aren't anything new - so allowing them to dominate the discourse is counterproductive.

Let me provide some clarification then. The word is on neo nazi websites and white supremacist websites that this is the perfect time to start a race war and they need enough violence to get it started. How much of that sentiment is planned action and how much is internet bravado and empty braggadocio is unknown to say the least. This is the internet so for every happy race warrior there's going to be a thousand internet tough guys.

To point there are examples already seen of some sketchy I'm not a protestor but I'm smashing stuff type behavior. At this state it's impossible to tell if it's anything other then a few examples of people who like smashing things taking the chance to smash or some of those white supremacist putting words into practice.

[loomer]

Except, of course, for those arrested who, when identified, are found to actually be from outside the state.

It's not unknown for government or private interests to send people into protests to stir up trouble, there's just as long a history of that as "outside agitators" being made-up bullshit. There was video of a guy methodically smashing windows at an Autozone in Minneapolis believed by many to be a police officer sent out to give the rest of the police a pretext for harsher methods - which would, in fact, be an "outside agitator" not from outside the state but from outside the actual protestors. There are also whacko groups in the US interested in instigating violence and/or race war who have, in fact, turned up at other demonstrations with the intention of causing trouble. Why is it beyond belief that they might be involved here, too?

Absolutely we have to be on guard against big authority framing the argument in their own favor, or outright lying. That doesn't mean outside provocateurs can't or don't happen.

Bluntly, there is a distinction between the agent provocateurs deployed by the police and the right and the 'outside agitators' claimed by the establishment. The establishment creates the appearance of outside agitation to discredit the legitimacy of the uprising, pure and simple, and it is for this reason that we must not dignify Barr et al's claims of 'outside agitators' even in the context of police undercovers.

So when we say 'this is not the work of outside agitators', it is not to say 'there are zero people who are not 100% part of the community involved in this riot'. It is a way of saying 'no, fuck off and take your framejob bullshit elsewhere'. We all know there's police undercovers and rightists who start shit. There always are, and they aren't anything new - so allowing them to dominate the discourse is counterproductive.

Let me provide some clarification then. The word is on neo nazi websites and white supremacist websites that this is the perfect time to start a race war and they need enough violence to get it started. How much of that sentiment is planned action and how much is internet bravado and empty braggadocio is unknown to say the least. This is the internet so for every happy race warrior there's going to be a thousand internet tough guys.

To point there are examples already seen of some sketchy I'm not a protestor but I'm smashing stuff type behavior. At this state it's impossible to tell if it's anything other then a few examples of people who like smashing things taking the chance to smash or some of those white supremacist putting words into practice.

I'm aware, but the distinction again must be made between the right and the cops (for instance, the white armband undercovers in NYC) doing what they always do and the attempt by the establishment to frame the entire violent uprising as nothing more than a few outside agitators 'perverting a peaceful protest'. The former is business as usual - there were proto boogaloo boys, undercover cops, and the usual shitheads trying to start shit in Ferguson too - but the latter is a deliberate attempt to frame every act of violence as an outsider's work.

This is an attempt to render the uprising as a whole morally suspect and to discredit the legitimacy of mass violent revolt against the state when the state is engaged in low-key warfare against your community. It is no coincidence that they're blaming 'white anarchists' for it, either - they're making efforts to delegitimize the opposition as nothing more than white supremacists and extremists, and thereby justify more violence in the crackdowns. The riots cannot be admitted to have any participation from within the community if they are to be condemned without triggering more unrest, and so the rhetorical divide between 'peaceful protestors from the community' and 'violent outsiders' is employed.

It is the exact same line that was used at Ferguson and that was used in the 50s and 60s. It's always an outsider trying to stir shit up - the community is told it can't possibly be angry enough to storm a police precinct and burn it down, that they wouldn't set up barricades and fight the cops in the streets. The community would never engage in violence against people shooting them, so if you're part of the community, put down that crowbar no matter how justified your grievance.

It is for this reason that we must reject the proposition that the violence is solely or primarily the work of outside agitators unless there is strong evidence that this is in fact the case. In the absence of such evidence, we must instead assume it is the same old tool being employed to divide and split the uprising's participants into 'good' and 'bad' and, having done so, to turn it on itself and to justify ignoring the rage that birthed the violence in the first place.

ed: On white anarchists, there's a line to be drawn here between white anarchists who are playing fool and those who are following the lead of Black anarchists. There are legitimate grievances with the former - but most of them are coming from these same cities and metropolitan areas, not out of state, as far as I've been able to tell.

[loomer]

Isn't this like, the third time Trump has declared he'll schedule antifa as a terrorist organization?

[MKSheppard]

Let me provide some clarification then. The word

LOL your own source says:

Bellingcat has documented the involvement in the protests of a largely white, and far-right movement called the Boogaloo

It's Seacow Snowplow now. Get with the latest codename.

[MKSheppard]

God, reading your "sources" is hilarious, Mr. Bean:

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2020/05 ... you-think/

The Boogaloo subculture’s origins also can be traced in part to 4chan, but to a different board, /k/, which is devoted to weapons.

LOLOLOLOL.

/k/ IS 4chan.

Anyway...

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/boogaloo

On April 7th, 2018, the phrase was used as a title in the firearm enthusiast subreddit /r/progun.[4]

[Broomstick]

In this post you admit you're not an American and your information is (at best) second hand, but yet you feel justified about pontificating on another nation and culture that is not your own. What an arrogant attitude. Are you going to foreignsplain some more?

Let me provide some clarification then. The word is on neo nazi websites and white supremacist websites that this is the perfect time to start a race war and they need enough violence to get it started. How much of that sentiment is planned action and how much is internet bravado and empty braggadocio is unknown to say the least. This is the internet so for every happy race warrior there's going to be a thousand internet tough guys.

To point there are examples already seen of some sketchy I'm not a protestor but I'm smashing stuff type behavior. At this state it's impossible to tell if it's anything other then a few examples of people who like smashing things taking the chance to smash or some of those white supremacist putting words into practice.

I'm aware, but the distinction again must be made between the right and the cops (for instance, the white armband undercovers in NYC) doing what they always do and the attempt by the establishment to frame the entire violent uprising as nothing more than a few outside agitators 'perverting a peaceful protest'. The former is business as usual - there were proto boogaloo boys, undercover cops, and the usual shitheads trying to start shit in Ferguson too - but the latter is a deliberate attempt to frame every act of violence as an outsider's work.

Just ignore that the fuckstick in the White House frames EVERY conflict as "real Americans" vs. "damn dirty foreigners", even when his "opposition" was born and raised here. That's a difference right there - during Ferguson the guy in the White House was actually interested in conflict resolution and doing something about police corruption. The guy currently there is encouraging it. The Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists post-Charlottesville, VA know they'll get a wink and nod from the asshole in the Oval Office when they kill someone.

Which is just one example of how you are mis-reading this situation. It is far more dangerous than you seem to grasp.

This is an attempt to render the uprising as a whole morally suspect and to discredit the legitimacy of mass violent revolt against the state when the state is engaged in low-key warfare against your community. It is no coincidence that they're blaming 'white anarchists' for it, either - they're making efforts to delegitimize the opposition as nothing more than white supremacists and extremists, and thereby justify more violence in the crackdowns.

Trump wants to frame this as ALL his enemies causing this - black people, brown people, poor people of any color, unemployed people of any color, strong women, Democrats, anyone who is NOT Trump-Republican. He's been calling all of those groups traitors for three fucking years. Post-impeachment, when there was not one damn consequence for his crimes, he feels he can get away with anything and he might even be right, which is scary as fuck. Trump is not singling out "white anarchists", he's bitching about black people, city people, Democrats, uppity governors, and on and on. Your viewpoint is wrong. Probably due to lack of information and your unfamiliarity with American culture and society.

The riots cannot be admitted to have any participation from within the community if they are to be condemned without triggering more unrest, and so the rhetorical divide between 'peaceful protestors from the community' and 'violent outsiders' is employed.

Trump doesn't give a fuck about not "triggering more unrest". He WANTS blood in the street. He wants an excuse to use his soldiers against anyone who opposes him, foreign or domestic. Again, you are misreading this situation. Trump does not want peace, resolution, or compromise. He wants to WIN. How has he always defined that? By crushing his opponents utterly. Why the hell do you think he's threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act and send in the Federal military against unarmed civilians? Why the fuck do you think he's threatening protesters in DC with "vicious dogs" and "ominous weapons"? Trump wants things to get worse, he would love an opportunity to literally kill those he perceives as enemies. Remember, this guy thinks everything bad is done just to hurt his re-election chances, regardless of whether that's a riot or a natural disaster. The guy who honestly thinks using a nuclear weapon on a hurricane is a good and viable idea. And let's not revisit injecting bleach.

Trump is NOT a normal oligarch/authoritarian/politician.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white- ... n1219656It is the exact same line that was used at Ferguson and that was used in the 50s and 60s. It's always an outsider trying to stir shit up - the community is told it can't possibly be angry enough to storm a police precinct and burn it down, that they wouldn't set up barricades and fight the cops in the streets. The community would never engage in violence against people shooting them, so if you're part of the community, put down that crowbar no matter how justified your grievance.

Good god - I've spent the last fucking 50 years listening to white people talk about how they can't understand why people would burn down their own neighborhoods, why are they destroying their own homes. Again, you are WRONG on this. The very fact these communities self-destruct and implode is used as a justification for greater and greater controls on those "dangerous" minorities who dare to try to stand up for themselves.

Leaving aside that there really are outsiders arriving whenever this shit happens, if for no other reason than to take advantage of whatever opportunities to steal and smash whatever they can, but also paid/politically motivated agitators, there actually is no doubt in the US that minority communities can riot and burn the cities. They've only been doing it since Colonial days.

Also, let's just ignore that it was NOT The Authorities that started pointing possible outside agitators but people within the protests, in some cases getting video footage of people the people in the community identify as outsiders. YOU are doing exactly what you're accusing The Powers That Be of doing - discrediting the testimony of the members of the community and the protest participants themselves.

It is for this reason that we must reject the proposition that the violence is solely or primarily the work of outside agitators unless there is strong evidence that this is in fact the case.

No one is fucking saying that, you ignoramus, that "the violence is solely or primarily the work of outside agitators" except maybe your buddies. Who the fuck are they and what are their credentials for speaking about US unrest?. There IS speculation that some of the arson and violence is outside agitators, but maybe that doesn't fit your go-to narrative.

ed: On white anarchists, there's a line to be drawn here between white anarchists who are playing fool and those who are following the lead of Black anarchists. There are legitimate grievances with the former - but most of them are coming from these same cities and metropolitan areas, not out of state, as far as I've been able to tell.

Fuck all anarchists - they aren't the solution, either. That way leads to rule by bullies and warlords. If you don't have the fortune to be one of the very few tough guys at the top you'll just have to bend over for your daily ass-fucking or be crushed. There's a reason we invented civilization - it's because it was safer for the average person.

"as far as I've been able to tell" - you've got some nerve, sitting on the other side of the planet playing armchair quarterback. Me, I got to spend way too much time in a meeting today talking about riot protocols for my place of employment and checking for roadblocks and protests between where I work and where I live.

Absolutely black people in the US have totally legitimate grievances. That's why a lot of people who aren't black are supporting this shit, going to protests, in some cases continuing to support the protesters even after their livelihoods have been destroyed. Maybe for you this is an academic exercise, for me it's happening down the block. Stick to posting facts and fuck your walls of text where you try to "explain" shit that isn't part of your nation, your culture, or your society.

And, just because pictures do say a lot, take a look at the faces in these crowds. This is not just black people protesting. It's people of all sorts protesting that injustice is injustice and is wrong.

Minneapolis


Los Angeles


Chicago


Detroit


New York City


I've been seeing people post for years about wanting to see Americans take to the street. Now they are. All sorts of Americans.

[FaxModem1]

Where do I start?

For one, I am now living under fucking curfew: WFAA

And for another, a Black Congressmen in Ohio has just been maced in the fucking face:

CNN

African-American congresswoman gets pepper sprayed during George Floyd protest in Columbus
Kelly Mena, CNN

Updated 4:24 AM ET, Sun May 31, 2020

Minneapolis mayor shakes his head over Trump's 'weakness' tweet
Washington, DC (CNN)Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty, an African-American congresswoman from Ohio, was briefly sprayed with "Mace or pepper spray" in downtown Columbus on Saturday while talking to people protesting the death of George Floyd.

"I was there because I wanted the young protesters to know that in solidarity, that I stand with them," Beatty told the local NBC 4 affiliate. "You know, I'm a grandmother, I'm an elected official, but I'm a black woman first and I felt the pain," she said.
Columbus City Council President Shannon Hardin said in a post on Twitter that he and the congresswoman were "sprayed with mace or pepper spray" and "we are all ok."
"We came out there to support them and be with them," Beatty said in a video on Hardin's Twitter page. "It was just something in my heart thinking about George Floyd, thinking about all of the injustices, that I needed to be out there, thinking I was protecting them and it probably was not safe," Beatty said.
Ohio Rep. Joyce Beatty, center, was pepper sprayed at a protest in Columbus on Saturday. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Ohio Rep. Joyce Beatty, center, was pepper sprayed at a protest in Columbus on Saturday. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Dominic Manecke, a spokesman for Beatty, told CNN the incident happened when Beatty was attempting to mediate tensions between protesters against Floyd's killing and Columbus Police Department officials.
"People are angry. Tensions are very high and she went down there as a voice of reason. She has a very good connection with the community and was trying to be a mediator ... I mean the cops knew who she was and thanked her."
Manecke explained to CNN that Beatty, whose 3rd District encompasses a large swath of Columbus, was trying to separate an officer and a protester when she got caught in the "melee" of both groups that resulted in her getting sprayed.
"One young black female took a step off (the curb) and the cop kind of took that, I guess, 'sideways.' Instantly, a white man kind of came to her defense and then was instantly body-slammed to the ground. The congresswoman runs out into the street to hold back the cop and the protesters. Another cop comes up with his bike and pushes the congresswoman out of the way ... and then it's naturally getting heated ... that one cop pulls, I don't know why he does it, he pulls out his Mace and does what he does," Manecke said.
CNN was unable to reach the Columbus Police Department for comment.
In the Twitter video, Beatty criticized the police reaction to the escalating tensions from protestors, saying "too much force is not the answer to this."
Beatty went on to to say that she is "so proud of all of the young folks" before calling for the protestors to remain calm.
"..We must continue to protest, but it must be peaceful and that does not mean we aren't standing up for justice," Beatty said.
Saturday marked the fourth day of escalating protests in multiple cities over the death of Floyd at the hands of a white police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Paid Content

A member of Congress has been assaulted by the police.

[Eulogy]

A member of Congress has been assaulted by the police.

How long do you think it will take until the rabid dogs in uniform start attacking National Guard members and soldiers?

[loomer]

snip

While I understand these are stressful days, at this time I will continue to prioritize listening to the voices of the Black, Brown, and Indigenous anarchists I know in the US and especially in the cities where the unrest is taking place. Have a nice day.

[loomer]

Some dickhead drove a tanker truck into the crowd on I-35. Doesn't look like he hit too many people, which is something.

[loomer]

He didn't hit anyone, apparently, but he got beat up a bit by the crowd before the cops pulled him out.

[loomer]

They've called in the Marshalls and the DEA to reinforce the White House in anticipation of another long night of protests.

[loomer]

The police have instigated violence at the Montreal protest, using tear gas and rubber bullets on a peaceful protest.

[mr friendly guy]

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1 ... 72704?s=19

Dominic Raab Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs for the UK naturally condemns Trump's statements about getting the military to shoot at protesters. Oh wait, he doesn't. Its not his place to comment on it apparently while in same breath, he says we can't look the other way in Hong Kong. HK cops have been way more restrained than US cops. Fuck the you Domnic Raab you piece of hypocritical shit.

[Gandalf]

In this post you admit you're not an American and your information is (at best) second hand, but yet you feel justified about pontificating on another nation and culture that is not your own. What an arrogant attitude. Are you going to foreignsplain some more?

Are you seriously stating that the accuracy of a point depends on the nationality of the person making it?

[Elfdart]

There appears to be no meaningful evidence for the claims that most of the uprising is down to outside interference. It's a standard argument used against almost any uprising by Black America - constantly bandied about in the 50s and 60s, blaming them damn communists - and any violent revolt.

It's not just old bullshit, it's bullshit that dates back to the 1840s, when slave owners claimed Northern abolitionists were stirring up their happy and contented "darkies" into running away. The bullshit was alive and well right after WW1, when Woodrow Wilson blamed the "bolshevists" in Russia for inciting a "negress" into asking for higher pay:

Everything You Need to Know About U.S. Foreign Policy in One Short Paragraph

This is from the March 10, 1919 diary entry of Cary Grayson, Woodrow Wilson's personal doctor:

…the President said…that if the present government of Germany is recognizing the soldiers and workers councils, it is delivering itself into the hands of the bolshevists [sic]. He said the American negro returning from abroad would be our greatest medium in conveying bolshevism to America. For example, a friend recently related the experience of a lady friend wanting to employ a negro laundress offering to pay the usual wage in that community. The negress demands that she be given more money than was offered for the reason that "money is as much mine as it is yours." Furthermore, he called attention to the fact that the French people have placed the negro soldier in France on an equality with the white men, and "it has gone to their heads."

That one paragraph truly contains everything you need to know about U.S. foreign policy:

1. It's built on a foundation on upper class twit urban legend. Who knows what really happened with the "friend of a friend" of Woodrow Wilson. But I think we can be certain that, if the "negress" actually did exist, she didn't ask for more money than usual because she was inspired by bolshevism to say "money is as much mine as it is yours."

This reminds me of the time shortly after the 1992 Los Angeles riots when the nephew of a huge Hollywood producer told me he'd heard that all the black people in Compton were making plans for next time, when they were going to come burn down the three B's: Brentwood, Beverly Hills and Bel Air. Sure, you bet.

2. The terrifying danger that the U.S. upper crust perceived in 1919 wasn't that the lower orders were going to stage a Bolshevik revolution. It wasn't even that they were going to try to get the right to vote and have a voice in the government. It was that they were asking for a raise.

(Also, worker councils were not a good idea that made workplaces run better, but pure revolutionary bolshevism. If you paid attention to the right-wing freakout over the UAW trying to organize the VW plant in Chattanooga, you saw nothing whatsoever has changed.)

3. The terrifying danger wasn't coming from just any part of the lower orders, it was from the teeming non-white masses who want to take all our money.

4. What was the the natural response to the threat of a slight change in political and economic power within the U.S.? It was to invade another country (in this case, the nascent Soviet Union), together with the other main white powers, the UK and France.

You can draw a direct line from this diary entry to every foreign policy action taken by the U.S. in the past 95 years.

Jon Schwarz

And much of domestic policy, too.

It's bad enough when right-wingers spew this kind of vomitus, but when "liberals" like Susan Rice go on TV to try to blame the Russians for the protests, vandalism and police brutality, who needs Glenn Beck?

[loomer]

In this post you admit you're not an American and your information is (at best) second hand, but yet you feel justified about pontificating on another nation and culture that is not your own. What an arrogant attitude. Are you going to foreignsplain some more?

Are you seriously stating that the accuracy of a point depends on the nationality of the person making it?

It certainly appears so, but honestly, it's not worth engaging with. Broomstick's made it abundantly clear in multiple threads that she doesn't view posting as creating any kind of reasonable expectation of mutual dialogue, so I recommend just shrugging and moving on.

There appears to be no meaningful evidence for the claims that most of the uprising is down to outside interference. It's a standard argument used against almost any uprising by Black America - constantly bandied about in the 50s and 60s, blaming them damn communists - and any violent revolt.

It's not just old bullshit, it's bullshit that dates back to the 1840s, when slave owners claimed Northern abolitionists were stirring up their happy and contented "darkies" into running away. The bullshit was alive and well right after WW1, when Woodrow Wilson blamed the "bolshevists" in Russia for inciting a "negress" into asking for higher pay:

And much of domestic policy, too.

It's bad enough when right-wingers spew this kind of vomitus, but when "liberals" like Susan Rice go on TV to try to blame the Russians for the protests, vandalism and police brutality, who needs Glenn Beck?

Bingo. The people I've been listening to explaining this have all been Black activists and academics from America, none of whom are particularly pleased to see the old canard of the Outside Agitator being used to explain away the uprising.

[PainRack]

God, reading your "sources" is hilarious, Mr. Bean:

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2020/05 ... you-think/

The Boogaloo subculture’s origins also can be traced in part to 4chan, but to a different board, /k/, which is devoted to weapons.

LOLOLOLOL.

/k/ IS 4chan.

Anyway...

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/boogaloo

On April 7th, 2018, the phrase was used as a title in the firearm enthusiast subreddit /r/progun.[4]

Are you trying to twist his source ?

Like many other novel extremist movements, the loose network of pro-gun shitposters trace their origins to 4chan
.........


Open source materials suggest that, for now, the apocalyptic, anti-government politics of the “Boogaloo Bois” are not monolithically racist/neo-Nazi. As we have observed, some members rail against police shootings of African Americans, and praise black nationalist self defense groups.

But the materials also demonstrate that however irony-drenched it may appear to be, this is a movement actively preparing for armed confrontation with law enforcement, and anyone else who would restrict their expansive understanding of the right to bear arms. In a divided, destabilized post-coronavirus landscape, they could well contribute to widespread violence in the streets of American cities.

Mainstreaming Civil War: From /k/ To Facebook
In recent weeks, the term “Boogaloo” has gone mainstream after months of growing popularity in online far-right communities. Nationwide anti-lockdown protests have provided an opportunity for right-wing militias to rally, armed, in public.

Much has been written about the “astroturfing” behind the initial rallies, particularly the first Lansing, Michigan rally. It is certainly true that mainstream conservative personalities and organizations have helped fuel this growing movement. Dark money, however, is not what turned “Boogaloo” into a household term.

It was 4chan that gave it its start. Now, above all, it is Facebook that’s helping it along.

Your point about firearms was also noted by them.

In recent posts on the board, /k/’s users discuss all manner of weapons from knives to fighter jets. Their overwhelming focus is on firearms.

Posters frequently post about unusual weapons, hunting military equipment, military history, or ongoing wars. Frequently, posts center on users’ own firearms and tactical gear, or asking advice about future purchases.

/k/ is hardly a bastion of sweetness and light (like all 4chan boards, it is littered with every imaginable slur), but unlike /pol/, militant white nationalism is not the default ideological position.

Although gun owners tend to lean right, the board explicitly discourages any political discussion. A “sticky” post at the top of the forum, made in October 2015, just as the “alt right” culture born on /pol/ was turbocharging the Trump campaign, warns that discussions of politics (even gun control) are unwelcome.

They were clearly trying to differentiate /k from /pol subculture, and how that meant the movement itself has a slightly different subculture than alt right neo Nazis at Charlottesville, even though many of it's members are probably racist neonazis.

More importantly, everyone who knows about memes remember Electric Boogaloo, the movement itself took that meme and converted it to an accelerationist civil war like scenario.

In this post you admit you're not an American and your information is (at best) second hand, but yet you feel justified about pontificating on another nation and culture that is not your own. What an arrogant attitude. Are you going to foreignsplain some more?

Are you seriously stating that the accuracy of a point depends on the nationality of the person making it?

I think her point was more how accurate is Loomer post, when his info is likely second hand and contradicts the actual black community members cited in the sources provided.

Because black anarchists in Minneapolis is not the sole source of news and motivation for the protests.

[Elfdart]

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/p ... d-protests

Photojournalist blinded by police during George Floyd protests

A photojournalist covering the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis has been left permanently blinded in one eye after being shot in the face with a rubber bullet by police.

Bet you Human Rights Watch is going to be silent.

They're too busy doing PR for one putsch after another against duly elected governments.

[loomer]

People are, of course, free to discount my position if they genuinely think that the people I'm listening to are wrong and totally unrepresentative, but I'd like to make a point here.

The basic dynamics of splitting a movement into 'good, peaceful protestors' and 'dangerous outside radicals' is not unique to the United States by any stretch. The attempt to discredit legitimate grievances by insinuating that the real protestors would never do anything violent takes place almost any time you see a significant riot against the status quo where violence is employed by non-state actors. Remarking on this requires no special expertise in the American context - a general awareness of tactics used to divide and control protest movements is sufficient.

Where that expertise is helpful is in analyzing the racial dimension, but on that front, it bears mention that it's not just Black, Brown and Indigenous anarchists who are upset about the 'outside agitators' canard. I listen more to anarchists and communists because that's where my contacts are, but it takes very little effort to find even relatively mainstream figures in the African-American communities of the cities that are in revolt refusing to denounce the violence as being solely the work of outside agitators - which is precisely what various governors, mayors, police chiefs, and the AG are claiming is the case - because, while there are always opportunistic shitheads who come in to loot and stir shit up, much of the anger involved is both real and rooted in the community, and putting the potential for violence solely onto outsiders both denies the African-American community agency and diminishes the threat implicit in any revolt.

The combination of this - where I've been looking at what those people are saying in the context of history and a general understanding of social movements and tools used against them - is where I am apparently 'foreignsplaining' (by... listening to Black, Brown and Indigenous anarchists and accepting their positions?) the canard of the outside agitator because I am an Australian and thus, cannot possibly understand American culture despite being steeped in it daily thanks to America's global cultural hegemony and actively listening to Americans on the elements that require local understanding. That's what's more or less laughable.

Now, I note you mention 'the actual black community members cited' and contrast them to my 'second hand info'. Well - on what basis are you dismissing the actual Black community members (and make no mistake: anarchists are members of their communities) that I've been talking to and listening to, who are part of these same communities, as not being 'actual black community members'?

[loomer]

Cleveland is now extending its curfew until Tuesday. In combination with the crackdown on journalists - restricting their freedom to move downtown to monitor the protests - this isn't a great sign.

[Elfdart]

Bingo. The people I've been listening to explaining this have all been Black activists and academics from America, none of whom are particularly pleased to see the old canard of the Outside Agitator being used to explain away the uprising.

Especially the way Ku Kluxers and their allies in the police and right-wing media used the "outside agitator" line of attack to justify the murders of civil rights workers Viola Liuzzo, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner.

[The Romulan Republic]

Can we not acknowledge both: that some of the violence is a result of legitimate grievances (whether or not it is the most effective tactic is a separate debate), and that some of it is being done by outside agitators to discredit or hijack the protests? I do understand that some people may be making these claims with less than honest motives, but both statements are true, and I don't see why we can't acknowledge the presence of outside agitators and extremists while also acknowledging the legitimate grievances of the protesters. Especially as one of the likely motives of these agitators, in infiltrating the protests, is to discredit them, by having their acts falsely attributed to the protesters.


*I also wonder, and I acknowledge that I may be totally off-base here, if some of the looting is simply down to the fact that a quarter of the country is unemployed right now, the government is not providing adequate aid, and burglary under cover of a riot is literally the only way some people can acquire things that they need because they haven't had a pay check in two and a half months. This isn't meant as a critique of the looters by the way- when unemployed and struggling people take what they need from those who have more, my sympathy is generally with them.