I do stuff now

[the_dork_lord]

https://markhasthoughts.wordpress.com/2 ... -the-rich/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[maz89]

What's most alarming are the commenters on Facebook who cast blame on Mr Dao for acting like a whiny, pampered brat acting out because he didn't get his way. WTF. The big corporations are in it for the money, but what to make of this lack of empathy and subservient attitude? It was heartening to know that a few people walked out of the plane after they saw what happened. I just wish the number would have been much bigger.

[the_dork_lord]

It's mind-boggling to me how bootlickers think: The multi-billion-dollar company fucked up, so customers should have to pay the price, and should get roughed up if they don't agree with that reasoning.

These are the people who brag about how America is a free society, but believe that "Do what you're told and you won't get hurt" is a perfectly fine relationship between police and public.

[CashRules]

It's mind-boggling to me how bootlickers think: The multi-billion-dollar company fucked up, so customers should have to pay the price, and should get roughed up if they don't agree with that reasoning.

These are the people who brag about how America is a free society, but believe that "Do what you're told and you won't get hurt" is a perfectly fine relationship between police and public.

My favorite is when someone refuses to let the cops search their home or vehicle without a warrant and post a video of the belligerent asshole cops on Youtube there will be a bunch of asshats posting comments like "If you didn't have anything to hide why didn't you just let them search?"

A. Do these fuckwits have any understanding of why we have such a thing as search warrants? It's not my job to prove I don't have anything to hide, it's the cops job to prove I do - by following the fucking law.

B. Maybe I do have something to hide. Maybe there is a few hundred kilos of cocaine in my closet and four dead bodies buried beneath my house and if they want to know then they need to get a warrant.

[the_dork_lord]

They're the type of people who will see a cop raping someone and be like, "Well, you could've consented!"

[Chuckles_Otoole]

I hadn't heard about the teeth, so I went looking to verify that part:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 100409492/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I mean Jesus Christ, the fucking cops KNOCKED A 69-YEAR-OLD MAN's TEETH OUT FOR NO GODDAMN REASON.
I'll never fly United again, ever. Fuck that whole company. They can't go under soon enough.

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

I realise this is the "wrong" response and I'm meant to jump on the hate-bandwagon too, and I absolutely agree that there are a lot of racist and abusive policemen (and women) out there who take advantage of their powers and are generally shit at their jobs and not only should be sacked but should be locked up (or worse)...

...but...

...this "us versus them" attitude (from both sides) is only perpetuating the situation. How can anyone every hope for it improve if their response is always "I'm not going to do a fucking thing until they're perfect - in fact, I'm going to be as obstructive as possible until that happens, that'll encourage them!". Because it's never going to happen, is it?

I absolutely understand the anger and the desire the vent. I just don't think it's helpful in finding a long term solution.


In response to the article linked in the OP, I'm white and I think the police were completely wrong to even be called to the plane in the first place, let alone use that level of violence. The airline screwed up. If they wanted to get people off the plane then they should have just kept increasing the amount they were willing to offer people to voluntarily off-load themselves and eventually someone would have volunteered. But they "screwed up" so they need to fix it. (And they only screwed up by letting them board in the first place - I have absolutely no issue with the principal over booking flights - I understand the statistical reasoning behind it, but it should be dealt with at check-in long before they even got to the gate).

But the article isn't saying "resist the police", it's saying elect different politicians and get the laws changed so society changes. Taking it out on whatever random policeman happens to be in front of you (who in terms of the article is just another powerless peon like you are) is pointless and achieves nothing - it just puts them in a bad mood and exacerbates things, promoting the "us versus them" mentality at the lower levels - which is not where the real fight is - rather than against the empowered elites who are directing them against you.

My two cents anyway.

[Islandmur]

ahh but monk, it is because people have accepted this type of actions in the past without much ado, that this company reached a level where it thought it coiuld pretty much get away with anything. Look at the first replies from the CEO... they thought NOTHING of what had happened. It is only ththe drop in their worth because of the OUTRAGE, and the "i'm not flying united again" that changed their tunes. So it did work. Sometime you need to get outraged you need to let them know it is NOT ok no matter the legalities of it.

I once spent 3 days stuck at an airport because of overbooking. I had to throw a fit to finaly get a seat on the 3rd day, because my ticket wasn't paid in cash but was a family thing (my uncle died when a wing of a plane fell on him so we have so many tickers per year until auntie dies). So I kept being relegated to the end of the line.... because of overbooking.
Each flight had like 30 double booked seats! 30!

[BruceSmith78]

Monk hasn't commented here.

[BruceSmith78]

@opiate

Are you interpreting comments in this thread as encouraging or endorsing an "obstructive as possible" policy, or are you commenting in general? Because if it's the former, I wonder to which post you're referring. I don't think citizens expecting police to follow the due process of the law, as Brandon suggested, is being as obstructive as possible. Nor is not consenting to rape by the police, as Dork suggested, or expecting a little more from our police force than "do as you're told and you won't get hurt," as Dork also suggested.

Also, you do realize Dork wrote the article in the OP, don't you? And the point of the article wasn't that white people aren't objecting enough to the United Airlines incident, it's that white people aren't giving enough fucks about police brutality until something like the United incident occurs, and then we're suddenly like, "Oh shit, that could happen to us too."

[Islandmur]

Monk hasn't commented here.

ooops i meant opiate lol

[the_dork_lord]

it's saying elect different politicians and get the laws changed so society changes.

As the author of the article, I can assure you that the article isn't encouraging you to vote for "better" politicians. It's highlighting the nature of class struggle.

I'm not creating an "us vs. them" mentality. I'm pointing out that that's the nature of capitalism.

[the_dork_lord]

Also, you do realize Dork wrote the article in the OP, don't you? And the point of the article wasn't that white people aren't objecting enough to the United Airlines incident, it's that white people aren't giving enough fucks about police brutality until something like the United incident occurs, and then we're suddenly like, "Oh shit, that could happen to us too."

Yeah basically. It's pointing out that "middle-class" white people and working class minorities have the same interests, because the privileges of a white middle class life are an illusion. They're not a permanent element of our economic system.

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

@opiate

Are you interpreting comments in this thread as encouraging or endorsing an "obstructive as possible" policy, or are you commenting in general? Because if it's the former, I wonder to which post you're referring. I don't think citizens expecting police to follow the due process of the law, as Brandon suggested, is being as obstructive as possible. Nor is not consenting to rape by the police, as Dork suggested, or expecting a little more from our police force than "do as you're told and you won't get hurt," as Dork also suggested.

Also, you do realize Dork wrote the article in the OP, don't you? And the point of the article wasn't that white people aren't objecting enough to the United Airlines incident, it's that white people aren't giving enough fucks about police brutality until something like the United incident occurs, and then we're suddenly like, "Oh shit, that could happen to us too."

In general.

I hadn't realised that Dork wrote the article. And I certainly take the point, but I still don't really see what the pragmatic objective is. I (along with a whole bunch of other "liberal" white people) are horrified with police brutality, abuse of process and institutional racism.

But we've identified the problem - that's done. Repeatedly identifying the problem doesn't move the situation a long any. What's the solution? Experience has shown that people tend to want quick answer to even very complex problems and I don't think there is a quick answer to this. At least not one that's likely to come without a bunch of unintended consequences.

it's saying elect different politicians and get the laws changed so society changes.

As the author of the article, I can assure you that the article isn't encouraging you to vote for "better" politicians. It's highlighting the nature of class struggle.

I'm not creating an "us vs. them" mentality. I'm pointing out that that's the nature of capitalism.

Dork's telling us the problem is Capitalism. Which may or may not be the case - I suspect it's not - I suspect it has a lot more to do with good ol' fashioned racism in the vast majority of cases. But even if it was Capitalism's fault, what's the solution? A Marxist-Leninist workers' paradise?

[the_dork_lord]

But we've identified the problem - that's done.

That's the thing: We haven't. At least, not entirely. The problem lies way deeper than police having power trips. And some folks are realizing this, but it needs to be more widespread.

I suspect it has a lot more to do with good ol' fashioned racism in the vast majority of cases.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about: White folks think they're immune. They're not. Because racism is a manifestation of classism, and don't think for a second the ruling class wouldn't squash white people if they could get away with it.

what's the solution? A Marxist-Leninist workers' paradise?

Marxism isn't a utopian theory.

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

what's the solution? A Marxist-Leninist workers' paradise?

Marxism isn't a utopian theory.

I have to disagree with you there (I will also say that true free market Capitalism would be a horrific nightmare).

For Marxism to work everyone has to really get on board and be willing to put the "greater good" ahead of their personal needs/hopes/dreams (or somehow convince themselves that the "greater good" is their personal needs/hopes/dreams). And it just doesn't happen, because when you get a large body of people not everyone wants the same thing. The people that want to travel the world/have fabulous adventures/drive fast cars/whatever (and are willing to work extra hard to get that) may not be willing to work as hard for the "greater good". The people that will are only motivated to do some work because they really have to otherwise they risk losing their house may not be willing to work as hard for the "greater good" when their house has been assigned to them by the state and it's theirs regardless of whether or not they do any work.

And corruption and jealousy are built into Marxism. As new products, services and housing is produced there's no market forces to decide who gets it, it's down to a bureaucrat to decide. And being a human being they will make mistakes or play favourites. Even if they are as pure as the driven snow and doing everything they can to be fair, how do you decide who has the best claim to a limited resource? It's a judgement call that ultimately becomes an arbitrary decision a human is making and others will argue was the wrong decision.

Capitalism is a shitty system - I absolutely agree with that - but at least it kind of anticipates that people with behave badly. Marxism assumes everyone will act like saints.

Thankfully in reality we end up with (say it quietly) something in between. America is closer to the Capitalism end than most admittedly, but most Western Democracies have a fair chunk of Social Democracy stuff thrown in too. And most importantly even America passes laws to limited the excesses of the Capitalist Free Markets.

[the_dork_lord]

I have to disagree with you there

But that's because -- as demonstrated by what you wrote in the next paragraph -- you haven't read Marx. What you described isn't Marxist theory. It's a middle school misunderstanding.

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

I have to disagree with you there

But that's because -- as demonstrated by what you wrote in the next paragraph -- you haven't read Marx. What you described isn't Marxist theory. It's a middle school misunderstanding.

I did read Marx (a long time ago when I was Uni) and I remember it was about "state ownership of the means of production" and "from each as to their ability and to each as of their needs".

But if I'm missing some important points I'm happy to be re-educated.

[the_dork_lord]

"state ownership of the means of production"

Marxists believe in eliminating the state from existence. Some (Leninists, mostly) believe in a transitional period during which the working class takes control of the state and uses it to move towards a stateless society. But the idea that the state gives you your house ... even in the Leninist transitional phase, that's not how anything is supposed to work.

"from each as to their ability and to each as of their needs".

Marx's vast oversimplification of his own work, but how would this mean that people couldn't take vacations?

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

"state ownership of the means of production"

Marxists believe in eliminating the state from existence. Some (Leninists, mostly) believe in a transitional period during which the working class takes control of the state and uses it to move towards a stateless society. But the idea that the state gives you your house ... even in the Leninist transitional phase, that's not how anything is supposed to work.

"from each as to their ability and to each as of their needs".

Marx's vast oversimplification of his own work, but how would this mean that people couldn't take vacations?

Well doing it on a country by country basis to begin with seems a little bit more realistic than trying to arrange a spontaneous global revolution. And you say that they won't "give you your house", but if you have two people living in a six bedroom house and a six person family living in a one room bedsit and just by chance the two people didn't want to spontaneously offer up their house to the family that no-one would come along and "encourage" them?

I'm sure you could take vacations. There were vacations in the USSR. But it was a fairly limited choice of vacations. If someone's motivation in life comes from wanting to spend lots of money on travelling a lot and in style and that encourages them to work harder and earn more, why is that a bad thing?

[the_dork_lord]

And you say that they won't "give you your house", but if you have two people living in a six bedroom house and a six person family living in a one room bedsit and just by chance the two people didn't want to spontaneously offer up their house to the family that no-one would come along and "encourage" them?

Sure would. That's in the revolutionary era, though. Once communism has been established, this situation wouldn't exist in the first place.

If someone's motivation in life comes from wanting to spend lots of money on travelling a lot and in style and that encourages them to work harder and earn more, why is that a bad thing?

Nobody, including Marx, said it was. Socialism does not seek to stop anybody from enjoying the fruit of their labor. It only seeks to stop people from leeching off the labor of others. Under capitalism, it is the poorest who frequently work hardest and work the most unappealing jobs. Socialism would no doubt reverse this, and, if democratically decided on, there's no reason those who take on the least appealing/hardest roles couldn't be granted special privileges.

[OpiateOfTheMasses]

And you say that they won't "give you your house", but if you have two people living in a six bedroom house and a six person family living in a one room bedsit and just by chance the two people didn't want to spontaneously offer up their house to the family that no-one would come along and "encourage" them?

Sure would. That's in the revolutionary era, though. Once communism has been established, this situation wouldn't exist in the first place.

If someone's motivation in life comes from wanting to spend lots of money on travelling a lot and in style and that encourages them to work harder and earn more, why is that a bad thing?

Nobody, including Marx, said it was. Socialism does not seek to stop anybody from enjoying the fruit of their labor. It only seeks to stop people from leeching off the labor of others. Under capitalism, it is the poorest who frequently work hardest and work the most unappealing jobs. Socialism would no doubt reverse this, and, if democratically decided on, there's no reason those who take on the least appealing/hardest roles couldn't be granted special privileges.

Ah... we're back to some bureaucrat making judgement calls again. The same type of judgement calls that lead to coal miners getting paid more than doctors in the USSR because it was a physically harder/less pleasant job? But of course, the doctor doesn't mind because (s)he's a True Believer and his/her sole motivation is the "greater good"...

But I think we're going round in circles a bit here. I maintain that "true" Capitalism and "true" Socialism (in whatever form) are both fundamentally flawed and our only hope is to find something in between them (or perhaps come up with something else entirely).

[Chuckles_Otoole]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/united ... OCID=HPDHP" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I hope he got at least an 8-figure payout. I mean Jesus, they knocked out two of his teeth. That's a permanent disfigurement.