Jesus Christ jtem will yer just fuck up!? Stop being judgemental, ignorant and often slightly racist and let others have their opinions without feeling the need to undermine them.
I’m pretty sure if you look real hard you could find a contradiction or two in there. Or, am I giving you too much credit?
No, I think
No. No, you didn’t. Nobody was attacked for agreeing with her, though foul language and incredibly stupid statement were plentiful. If you thought at all you might’ve noticed this. I stated an honest, accurate opinion. The fact if, if there were no British inside the partition the partition would instantly end. The existence of Brits within the partition perpetuate it’s existence.
You don’t have to like this, you don’t have to like me for saying it, but it is true. Any Brit in the northern counties, any Brit at all is not only benefiting from the repression (they can only do what they are doing because of the partition and occupation), but they are helping to perpetuate it.
It’s true. It is a fact. Go, swear some more, tell me that you know better because you once had tea someplace I didn’t. None of it changes anything, and none of it changes the fact that this “sniper” only said what she said because (now get this) she’s the Brit in question, the one that began this exchange.
I don’t expect her to like being singled out, to have the finger pointed at her and being identified as part of the problem. It’s actually reasonable that she be uncomfortable with this, not like it one bit. But as you’re not supposed to be her and every last word of it is true, yeah, I expect more from you.
…but received only disappointment.
This is ridiculous. I never swore at you, I never called you names, I never flouted my being from here over your being an (Irish?) American so you can’t use that against everybody who argued with you.
And what you’re saying is not fact. I’ve already explained to you how it’s not fact in the previous reblog, because it’s a native issue with Irish people being unionists and loyalists. You simply keep ignoring every point that contradicts you and go on arguing like they were never said.
First off: I live in a shit fake, puppet statelet that is oppressive and unjust. You seem, for some odd reason (particularly for someone who follows me and sees me post Irish Republican Socialist related posts), to think that I don’t recgonize this. I’m anti-British state, I’m anti-British occupation, I’m pro-united Irish Socialist Republic and I have no qualms with militant and active protest or action against the British state and it’s attempts to continue the oppression of the people in Ireland and the occupation of the Six Counties. This does not mean I shouldn’t give a shit about any other injustice in the world, in fact if anything it means I should be more angered to see such actions around the world and should refuse to have no opinion on it or stay neutral.
You’re passionate. And the more topics, the more examples, the more injustices you’re passionate about, the less passionate you seem towards any one of them. All that passion is still there, but it’s there all the time, regardless of subject, so the passion is no longer associated with the cause but with you.
All politics is local. And this is what it comes down to. Ireland, the middle east, the American justice system: They are all political problems with political solutions. And all politics is local. And it’s local because if people don’t see a role in it for themselves personally, if they don’t see anything specific they can do (and that means other than feel bad about it), real action they can take, it’s just a sad story.
The more issues you champion, the bigger you make the problem, the more helpless (read: Hopeless) the individual is against such a huge problem, the less likely anything will ever get changed. After all, all politics is local, and at a local level there’s nothing the little guy can do against such an enormous slate of problems.
You have to think of political change like a business. A business is out to make money, right? But not any way it can. If you open a restaurant, for example, you can’t send half your time trying to sell the customers a used Volvo.
“Both both are money making ventures, and the idea of a business is to make money.”
It doesn’t work that way. Nobody in the market for a used car wants to be herded into a restaurant booth and forced to buy something, waiting for someone to come to the table with the daily automobile selections. Or, antiques for that matter. And who wants to go out for a meal only to have the waiter constantly hounding them to buy life insurance, a used Volvo and magazine subscriptions? The business would fail. Yes, these are all “money making” ventures, and a business is created specifically to make money, but it has to concentrate on it’s specialty: It’s a restaurant. That’s how you sin customers.
If you want political change than you’re trying to win over those exact same people. The very same people shopping, working and going to restaurants. The very same people who are the “Customers” of ever successful business are the people you are trying to win over, and you’ve got to win them the exact same way. And as that restaurant didn’t get successful trying to sell everyone who walked through their door a used Volvo, you’re not going to get successful moving them to change Ireland if you’re trying to get them to do everything from re-write the middle east to protect teachers in Chili and reforming the American justice system.
….if for no other reason than if they disagree with you on one issue you’re likely to lose them on all the issues.
Pick an issue. Get good at it. Make a plan. Succeed. THEN move on to the next issue.
I disagree with this, and it’s as simple as that. I respect that you think this, but I think that if you don’t take an internationalist outlook you’re not going to get very far either. The world is globalised (and further globalising), the local is very quickly becoming the global, and we’re influenced by different things in different places. I see no issue with caring about different things, on a level where I’m trying to engage individuals in the real world I try not to overlap too many issues, I stick to the one depending on the type of event I’m at, the cause I’m rallying for, the circumstance of the time… But different issues should be brought up at different times. If I’m only considering Ireland, I’ve failed. I should be able to empathize with international issues and, if at any point - though it’s difficult a lot of them - act on injustices, even if it’s simply by offering visible solidarity. Solidarity from other people is instrumental in struggle, Ireland above all other examples shows this. There would be no Irish struggle without the help and solidarity of other nations.
This is why I say you’re young:
- When did I say I wanted anyone in Georgia to suffer? I said I wanted Georgia to be set on fire - a pro-riot stance - I want the people to show their anger. I don’t want any civillian to suffer, I want vocal and visible anger to showcase a rejection of the injustice that the American “justice” system and the American state reeks of.
First off, you’re living in the single WORST example of state repression within the western world. One would have to travel outside of the west to find more repression, a worse treatment of a people than the Irish in Ireland by the British. Yet, you’re blowing a gasket over a murder case in the U.S.
Secondly, it is impossible for there to be riots in Georgia without the people of Georgia suffering. Burn Georgia and you’re burning their businesses, their jobs and their communities. The simple fact of the matter is, after it’s all said and done, they have to live there.
Finally, who told you that the American justice system is any worse than anywhere else, and how is it you missed their sarcasm?
Our justice system is bad, awful in fact, but not one iota worse than anywhere in Europe, and quite often better in comparison. We;re more open than most of the world, including Europe, so our problems get more exposure, but don’t mistaken a lack of exposure in europe for a lack of inequalities, a lack of corruption. In fact, problems are exactly like mold in that they both flourish where there is no light.
You clearly are a very passionate person, you have strong emotions. The trick is to get those emotions to inspire you, not rule you. And when you allow them to paint an inaccurate picture of the world, as they clearly have in the case of the American justice system, they are ruling you.
That still has nothing to do with age. There’s nothing more childish that being pretentious and condescending over somebody’s age. I disagree with you on plenty of things, I don’t boil it down instantly to you being “too young”. It’s obnoxious and it’s a really futile attempt to patronise somebody because if makes you look incapable of arguing otherwise.
First off: I live in a shit fake, puppet statelet that is oppressive and unjust. You seem, for some odd reason (particularly for someone who follows me and sees me post Irish Republican Socialist related posts), to think that I don’t recgonize this. I’m anti-British state, I’m anti-British occupation, I’m pro-united Irish Socialist Republic and I have no qualms with militant and active protest or action against the British state and it’s attempts to continue the oppression of the people in Ireland and the occupation of the Six Counties. This does not mean I shouldn’t give a shit about any other injustice in the world, in fact if anything it means I should be more angered to see such actions around the world and should refuse to have no opinion on it or stay neutral. You clearly have no idea about my politics or my dedication to the Irish Republican movement, if you did you’d already have understood why I’m so angry about other issues in the world. I live in a shit place, are you saying because of this I shouldn’t give a shit about Palestine, the Basque Country, racism in America, classism world-wide, feminism in Italy, the international fight against fascism and so on?
Secondly: Not suffer directly from physical violence towards them. Of course they’d suffer indirectly, but I don’t consider this a reason not to riot - I’m not suggesting they riot in residential areas or anything like that, I’m talking in towns and cities - businesses going down will be a tragedy to a degree to some, but that whole financial worry is part of the systemic issue, racism flourishes when there is a need to divide the working-class and it’s necessary in a corrupt American society, a riot which attacks property is not something I consider to be a travesty. It’s an attack on part of the problem which led to such injustice.
Finally: when did I see the American justice system is worse than anywhere else in the world? I care about global injustice through state justice systems, but we were talking about the American justice system in this particular case. You seem to have this constant opinion that because it’s bad elsewhere I shouldn’t give a shit about it. Claiming the whole of Europe’s prison system is worth than America’s however is simply wrong. In some parts of Europe, yes. But the American system is far worse and far more unjust than most areas of Europe.
It also entirely dilutes the message and the situation of the Troy Davis case.
You’re young, you’re never going to understand this let alone listen to me, but here are the facts:
As long as you make your death penalty case about Troy Davis or anyone else, you’re actually empowering those who favor the death penalty. Because when you’re saying that the death penalty is wrong IN THIS CASE because he’s innocent, or because there isn’t enough evidence, what you’re telling them is that they need only believe he is guilty or that there is enough evidence to claim moral authority.
I’ll boil it down even further: It can’t be about guilt or innocence, it has to be about the death penalty itself… weather it is appropriate for a modern society.
Again, it can’t ever be about a case, the specifics surrounding a person. It always has to be around the death penalty itself.
Some people have more information than you. Some people see things differently than you do, interpret them differently. Most people have “Gut feelings.” If you allow the question of guilt or innocence into the debate, you’re granting a moral position to any one of these people who conclude/perceive/believe a subject to be guilty.
So never make is about Troy Davis or anyone else. Make it about the death penalty.
My age has nothing to do with this, and the fact that you think you can disregard my entire argument simply because of my age is ridiculous. It shows nothing but how weak your argument is that you refuse to engage with me on that basis. I’ve made my argument about three times to you now, and everytime I do so you copy and paste bits that don’t really matter and completely ignore my point - if you’re not responding to my point, what on earth is the point of you replying to me at all?
I’m not saying “in this case”, if you’d read my other posts you’d have clearly seen that I said this is a systemic problem and it happens all the time, that the difference in this case was that it was taken up internationally and so nobody could ignore the injustice. If you’d stop picking and choosing what of my posts you want to use to make innane and inaccurate points, you’d see that I think this is a typical case and that it’s based, not only on his being innocent, but mainly on the racist and classist elements within the American justice system. I never once said anything different about if he were guilty, I made the point that the death penalty, implemented by the state is always wrong on every level. It is not appropriate for modern society for the state to have any right whatsoever to kill people.
But I’ll point out lol that I’ll make it about Troy Davis as well in certain posts. I’ve made, and will make in the future, my stance against the death penalty very clear. But this is also a tragic individual case - I will forever make claims, sociological and quantitative, against social issues like the death penalty, but I don’t like to think of things like this as mere statistics. He was an influential man, in his writings to the wider public and his supporters and to his family. He was microcosmic. A representative of many other people and he should be respected for this fact.
Now that we’ve sorted that, can we get back to your ridiculous statement that you still haven’t gotten back to me on:
“she’s against blaming (let alone punishing) all the Brits in British occupied northern Ireland for the brutal repression they benefit from, but she wants all of Georgia to suffer for one person”