• CapgrasDelusion@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    One side is trying to rob the rights of a group of people

    This is a fact.

    the other side is burning down their own cities claiming to be saving the lives of a marginalized group

    This is conjecture.

    One side is advocating for guns to stay legal and accessible while children are mass murdered

    This is a fact and a mainstream position of one side.

    the other side has members dressing up in all black and assaulting people in their peaceful protests

    This is a fantasy. And even were it true it’s not a mainstream position.

    One side is denying climate change as the world literally crumbles in front of us

    This is a fact.

    the other is advocating for the abolition of all law enforcement.

    This is a non sequitur, and also false beyond fringes.

    • Intralexical@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      the other is advocating for the abolition of all law enforcement.

      This is a non sequitur, and also false beyond fringes.

      To be fair, this last one was a slogan explicitly used, at a level where it could be reasonably seen as mainstream depending on how much time you spent on the wrong websites.

      Kinda interesting, really— In-group signalling incentives greatly harmed the chances for successful out-group messaging.

      And sad, maybe— Could have possibly gotten a good thing going at that point— But I guess “Decrease funding to violent law enforcement in order to reallocate more resources to preventative and constructive community services” just doesn’t have the right ring to it in today’s media environment.

      As it was, it was big enough to get serious attention from several major cities, while also being self-defeating enough to thus far have had apparently basically no lasting positive impact whatsoever yet.

      • CapgrasDelusion@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You linked an article about cutting funding. I responded to a ridiculous comment about the abolition of all law enforcement.

        • Intralexical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe it’s just me, but my default interpretation when I hear about something being “defunded” is more or less synonymous with complete elimination.

          Either way, it doesn’t really matter, since everything else that comment was saying was indeed just bunk, and even this funding thing was indeed still at most a relatively fringe messaging failure.