You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-3 points

The examples you gave are nothing like January 6th

My point was mainly proving that the idea that “Democrats would never storm the capitol” was wrong. Yes, January 6th was perhaps still more violent than Democrats’ previous attempts to do so, but if it’s about the amount of violence each party is guilty of, all we have to do is look at riots in the wake of George Floyd’s death that happened a mere 6 months later in many cities across the US, and continued for a very long time. Those protests caused far more death, injury, and property damage than January 6th, and while you could claim that they weren’t political in nature, it is a fact that it was overwhelmingly Democrat politicians who supported them, and Democrat voters who attended them.

I’m not really keen to get into an argument about which party is responsible for more violence, since counting up dead bodies seems rather sordid and probably won’t help much anyways to convince either of us to change our opinion on anything, so I propose we call this one a draw and simply say “both parties are perfectly willing to use violence in pursuit of their political goals and have clearly demonstrated this in the past”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

So, to recap:

Someone pointed out that Republicans did January 6th, a violent attempt to seize control of the government by overturning the results of the election. You then gave examples of Democrats supposedly doing the same thing. I pointed out that none of the examples you gave were anything like January 6th. You then gave reasons why January 6th wasn’t bad. I pointed out that none of those reasons changed the fact that it was a violent attempt by Republicans to seize control of the government by overturning the results of the election. You still have not provided an example of the Democrats doing the same thing.

Now you say, well, people from both parties do violence sometimes, so let’s call it a draw. I appreciate the wisdom of making a strategic retreat, but no. You made bad arguments. Now you have to admit you are wrong one of two ways. You could just be explicit, come out and say it. More likely you’ll do it implicitly, by changing the subject or not responding at all.

I’m not really keen to get into an argument about which party is responsible for more violence

I get it. I don’t like getting into losing arguments either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

No, someone said “yeah I remember when those crazy Democrats got a bunch of their voters together to storm the Capitol” and then I gave 3 examples of when they DID, in fact, do that.

Basically, the claim was that “Democrats would never…”, so that’s what I set out to disprove.

  • Did both Democrats and Republicans ever storm the Capitol? Yes they did
  • Did both Democrats and Republicans ever engage in violent protests that caused massive property damage and death? Yes they did

All you’re doing now is moving goalposts in order to make those events appear more reasonable when it was your side doing them, so you can continue vilify the other side for doing the same thing. Which means you are excusing political violence while simultaneously opposing it.

That’s not tenable position, you understand? It’s just wanting to have your cake and eat it, too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

All you’re doing now is moving goalposts

Moving the goalposts is saying the opposite of “the Democrats did” is “the Democrats would never” (when you first attempted this shift I pointed out that neither I nor the person you responded to made this claim, which is still true).

Moving the goalposts is saying that a peaceful protest that took place in the capitol is somehow “storming” the capitol in the same sense as January 6th.

Moving the goalposts is saying that a fringe group that never had the support of the Democratic party and was not made up of Democratic voters was the Democrats.

Moving the goalposts is ignoring an extremely important aspect of January 6th; an attempt to seize control of the government, which to my knowledge has never happened at the behest of the Democratic party.

You know what? Let’s move the conversation a little in the direction you’ve tried to take it, if you really want. I’ll affirm this:

No member of the current Democratic party leadership would never encourage Democratic voters to behave violently, to illegally occupy the capitol building, or to seize control of the government via undemocratic means. And, if some democrats do any of these, they will condemn it; if they have the power, they will stop it. By current Democratic party leadership, I mean Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and other similar figures. Candidates who are popular but marginalized in party structure do not count. For instance, I don’t think Bernie Sanders would either (except maybe occupying the capitol building), but he’s not part of Democratic party leadership. This is assuming that their views do not change significantly from where they are at present via unforeseen events.

And, I affirm this is plainly not true of Republican party leadership (Donald Trump, Kevin McCarthy/Mike Johnson, Mitch McConnell etc.), given the events leading up to, on, and after the January 6th insurrection. (And I will point out that since I made the strong claim of “no member would” above, proving this claim/disproving that claim means “any member did”)

permalink
report
parent
reply

Greentext

!greentext@sh.itjust.works

Create post

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you’re new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

  • Anon is often crazy.
  • Anon is often depressed.
  • Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

Community stats

  • 8.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 935

    Posts

  • 38K

    Comments