Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to Miranda7's blog Subscribe


Special Features


The three comments below were posted by others on NYT message boards. Not my words but I concur

When political organizers, however despicable their ideas, are found liable for arranging a demonstration that turns violent, all political demonstrations are at risk. Protests are quintessential First Amendment conduct and so this verdict jeopardizes all kinds of demonstrations protected by the First Amendment. I trust the case will be reversed. If not, be wary of ever organizing a political demonstration.
The 77 pages of instructions from the judge explained how engaging in a conspiracy did not require all participants to forge an agreement or meet in the same room, or even to know one another. Nor did a conspiracy require the participants to have caused the violence themselves. The main point was that they all shared an objective and could foresee the violence that occurred."
By these standards, there should be hundreds of cases filed against BLM organizers for the violence which occurred at the mostly peaceful protests last year

This verdict will very likely bite back, if held ...

If those who got official permission for a demonstration are held liable/responsible for the actions of counterprotestors and anyone other than themselves, what "responsibility of organisers" will be tried in our courts over demonstrations/protests that were not given official permission and turned into violent riots in the past or the future?

Precedent is a part of our laws and this sets a new precedent to be used in future.

It might behove many to stop and think before cheering over this, in my humble opinion.

Clearly a whole lot of citizens know little about the laws or believe laws should only be applied to some for historical, ideological or emotional reasons, not all. That is not going to happen.

Dan, The conversation was about race relations, so glad to hear you are in agreement with me.
As for economic equations, I agree that the effects of redlining, historical wage discrimination, Jim Crow laws and yes, even slavery have carried forward through generations and therefore still impact today's landscape. Certainly Black families would be better off economically economics would be in better shape if not for those factors. BUT those conditions have also improved dramatically over the last few decades (with exceptions) and I would be inclined to believe there is a net overall improvement in Black family economics over that same time period relative to a similar index for non-Black famillies. I don't know what the stats show, however. Yav (and my daughter) seem to believe that everything is worse than ever.

The exception I would make is redlining, land taking and neighborhood splitting. Many Black families who still own older homes impacted by those actions have seen declining equity values as a direct result. This is also obscured by a broader problem of declining equity for homeowners in lower income neighborhoods, mostly due to crime and middle class flight. Relocating overpasses and reunifying neighborhoods may result in gentrification of these neighborhoods and help reverse these trends, but that isn't necessarily a good thing either. Gentrification wipes out affordable housing, forcing out struggling residents. It is a complex problem that "anti-racism" can't solve.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable