(08-14-2014, 04:00 PM)WCPhils Wrote: [ -> ]I just feel like you're judging a person and deciding to dislike them when you know almost nothing about them. I really really can't stand the internet's hatred of the police. (lol, though honestly with what's going on in Ferguson there are a lot of shitheads) It just bothers me that so many people have this hatred of people that by and large are likely good people. The shitheads stand out because we don't have stories of officers being good people and doing their jobs. Just when one asshole does something wrong.
I know right? I don't get it. Every blue moon that a police officer is filmed doing a shitty thing, so many of my Facebook friends need to point it out and post retarded comments like "Protect and serve my ass, the police are all [place any insult here]". It's like, you realize that you're no better than a closet racist, right?
The big one was a few months back, when a local video surfaced of a starving homeless man being threatened by an officer warning him that he was going to handcuff him to a pole in -20C* weather, for what was essentially no reason, and since then there are periodically new local corrupt police videos surfacing on Facebook. I get that some police officers are shitheads and that power can corrupt, but at this point it's become practically unintentional propaganda made by the people.
It's similar to how everyone bitches and complains about how Canada (or Quebec in particular) is like,
super corrupt, when in fact, it's one of the
least corrupt countries
in the world. I think only the Scandinavian countries are better off than us in that way.
(08-14-2014, 04:00 PM)WCPhils Wrote: [ -> ]One of my best friends just became a cop so that's why it bothers me. He is genuinely one of the nicest people I have ever met. Just a great guy. And it saddens me that so many people will just look at him as some big meathead (He's 6'4" and built like a linebacker) who is going to abuse his power first chance.
Coming from a school that makes police officers, firefighters, ambulancers and other protection workers, I can tell you the meathead, douchebag stereotypes mostly apply to firefighters (but a large portion of them really don't help their case; I know a few that are swell people though).
(08-14-2014, 04:01 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I kind of have a weird opinion (note: It's not 'all cops are pigs' but overall it's not positive either) towards the police but I'm sure your friend is fine.
Yea, I get that. I think it's one of those position that will attract a lot of not so great people. Because... well those are people that want power. It makes sense.
I don't even care when someone says what you just said. It's more when they talk in absolutes. Yea, there are a lot of asshole cops, and yes the police force as an entity should punish those guys more harshly. But we still never hear about all the ones who aren't like that. Because of what grungie said most likely
Also, I just wanted to say Will that I really enjoy talking about this stuff with you because you're really cool and respectful of everyone's opinions even if they disagree with you (unless someone is being a total tool :p ). Which is almost never seen on the internet.
(08-14-2014, 04:17 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]The most anti-war people I have ever met are war veterans.
Make sense. I think if you went through something like that you would be pretty against other having to do the same.
(08-14-2014, 04:19 PM)WCPhils Wrote: [ -> ]Yea, I get that. I think it's one of those position that will attract a lot of not so great people. Because... well those are people that want power. It makes sense.
I don't even care when someone says what you just said. It's more when they talk in absolutes. Yea, there are a lot of asshole cops, and yes the police force as an entity should punish those guys more harshly. But we still never hear about all the ones who aren't like that. Because of what grungie said most likely
Also, I just wanted to say Will that I really enjoy talking about this stuff with you because you're really cool and respectful of everyone's opinions even if they disagree with you (unless someone is being a total tool :p ). Which is almost never seen on the internet.
Make sense. I think if you went through something like that you would be pretty against other having to do the same.
daww that's so sweet.
I can't comment much else on the police topic because it's such a complex issue. I have no idea how to solve it.
And yeah I can sympathise with anyone who has had to gone through war, regardless of which 'side' they are on or whether they are a civilian or in the military. People accuse me of being 'anti-troops' because of my stance towards militarism, but I'd argue that this 'support the troops' culture, with all of its slogans and country-ballads, is more dehumanising than anything.
On the subject of militarism, I once had the rose-tinted glasses view that war is always bad and that armies shouldn't exist, but since (and only because) they do, I believe more in the possibility of what is called "just war". There's an entire study of what a just war is, dating back to several centuries. Saint Thomas himself wrote about it, and he was a Capuchin monk, for what is generally supposed to be a pacifistic religion.
War (in the strict sense) is always atrocious and horrible, but the ancient Romans were right when they said Si vis paces, para bellum, which means "If you want peace, prepare for war" (and God knows there aren't that many good things that came out of ancient Rome).
It means that if you want peace, your country needs to know how to fight, because it needs to know how to fend off any potential invaders. In other words, I believe no wars should be started, but the ideal thing to do is to end them, if that means you need to use brute force. Of course, Gandhian civil disobedience might be ideal, but when it fails to work, it's technically your duty to protect yourself, your family, your creed and your people. I say this as a coward who would most likely chicken out, however. I have tremendous respect for those who risk and sacrifice their lives for everyone else's well-being.
I am entirely against attacks towards civilians, though. Armies should only use necessary force, and I don't ever think civilian casualties are justified or the intentional cause of necessary force. As most people, I wish war wasn't a thing humans were capable of, but that is unfortunately not the truth.
(08-14-2014, 04:27 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]And yeah I can sympathise with anyone who has had to gone through war, regardless of which 'side' they are on or whether they are a civilian or in the military. People accuse me of being 'anti-troops' because of my stance towards militarism, but I'd argue that this 'support the troops' culture, with all of its slogans and country-ballads, is more dehumanising than anything.
Idk if the support the troops culture is dehumanizing, as cheesy as hearing the 800'th country song about it, I find that more encouraging than seeing people tell me that the troops are all morons for signing up to be mindless slaves and willingly gave up their stance at individuality and want to live a prison life.
I kind of agree but my hope is that as the world becomes increasingly interconnected we can reduce the prevalence of militarism. I'm not talking the complete abolition of armies/navies/etc. (they have important functions other than just war, but I think Costa Rica's stance is good anyway).
The thing I despise about it most is that there is still conscription in many parts of the world, and there aren't many wars that are actually being fought to 'defend your family and your country.' When I think back to WWI, for example I get really depressed. People being drafted, propaganda covering up the true terror of the war, slogans and posters describing war as a grand adventure, pressure on men to enlist because of 'warrior culture', neither side having good motives, etc. At least in today's first world democracies that's not as prevalent, but it's still definitely there, hence all the dehumanising glorifications of soldier's experiences that ignore how horrifying it is, and using them as political rhetoric to cover things up.
Edit: I don't disagree with your latter point Grungie but from at least what I can tell, outside of the internet (and maybe off a college campus lol) the glorifying depiction of it is way more prevalent. There's just something sad about hearing speeches about how these people had to die for our 'freedoms'. I think that no, they didn't have to die. And it generally feels like it doesn't do enough justice to what they actually had to sacrifice.
(08-14-2014, 04:33 PM)Grungie Wrote: [ -> ]I find that more encouraging than seeing people tell me that the troops are all morons for signing up to be mindless slaves and willingly gave up their stance at individuality and want to live a prison life.
The silly thing is, the non-individuality things that troops "give up"...like longer haircuts or facial hair, clothing of their choice, etc. ...the reason all those things are mandated are to help keep the troops alive. For instance, the "no facial hair" rule is so that soldiers/airmen/sailors can put on a gas mask in an emergency situation and not have facial hair causing the mask to not seal properly. The rules are there to keep troops alive, whether that means enforcing discipline or directly preparing for a combat situation.
Also, just because you are forced to shave, keep your hair really short, and wear a uniform doesn't mean you stop being "your own person". That's a stupid notion. I spent enough time hanging out with some of my friend's dads (who were enlisted men) because I would be at my friends house or whatever...to know that there are still
very much individuals.
(08-14-2014, 04:40 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I kind of agree but my hope is that as the world becomes increasingly interconnected we can reduce the prevalence of militarism. I'm not talking the complete abolition of armies/navies/etc. (they have important functions other than just war, but I think Costa Rica's stance is good anyway).
What is Costa Rica's stance on military forces?
(08-14-2014, 04:44 PM)crazysam23 Wrote: [ -> ]What is Costa Rica's stance on military forces?
They abolished their military.
Iceland has too (kind of; they have a small militarised coastgaurd and as a member of NATO they have 40 'humanitarian assistants' deployed in Afghanistan under the ISAF). In WWII they tried to have no military but then the UK invaded them, and the USA took over and didn't restore independence until 1947 (or 1948 don't remember). #fucktheanglodomination.
(08-14-2014, 04:44 PM)crazysam23 Wrote: [ -> ]The silly thing is, the non-individuality things that troops "give up"...like longer haircuts or facial hair, clothing of their choice, etc. ...the reason all those things are mandated are to help keep the troops alive. For instance, the "no facial hair" rule is so that soldiers/airmen/sailors can put on a gas mask in an emergency situation and not have facial hair causing the mask to not seal properly. The rules are there to keep troops alive, whether that means enforcing discipline or directly preparing for a combat situation.
To clarify to the others, the "clothing of their choice" part is only during working hours, and when you're actually deployed, not stationed in a foreign country. You can still dress however the fuck you want when you're not working.
(08-14-2014, 04:44 PM)crazysam23 Wrote: [ -> ]Also, just because you are forced to shave, keep your hair really short, and wear a uniform doesn't mean you stop being "your own person". That's a stupid notion. I spent enough time hanging out with some of my friend's dads (who were enlisted men) because I would be at my friends house or whatever...to know that there are still very much individuals.
Yeah, I know quite a few characters in the military. I keep mentioning my sister, but one of my sister's hobbies is dressing in Lolita outfits, and she makes her own outfits for that kind of shit. Like this year for Dragoncon, she's made her own cosplay for Bioshock:
That costume looks sick.
(08-14-2014, 04:40 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]I kind of agree but my hope is that as the world becomes increasingly interconnected we can reduce the prevalence of militarism. I'm not talking the complete abolition of armies/navies/etc. (they have important functions other than just war, but I think Costa Rica's stance is good anyway).
Of course, and that is one positive thing about the internet -- that we can connect with people next town over, to next country over, to next hemisphere over.
(08-14-2014, 04:40 PM)carlcockatoo Wrote: [ -> ]The thing I despise about it most is that there is still conscription in many parts of the world, and there aren't many wars that are actually being fought to 'defend your family and your country.' When I think back to WWI, for example I get really depressed. People being drafted, propaganda covering up the true terror of the war, slogans and posters describing war as a grand adventure, pressure on men to enlist because of 'warrior culture', neither side having good motives, etc. At least in today's first world democracies that's not as prevalent, but it's still definitely there, hence all the dehumanising glorifications of soldier's experiences that ignore how horrifying it is, and using them as political rhetoric to cover things up.
Of course, and that is nowhere near just war. I am against conscription as well. Like I said, just war for me sums up to being limited to defense and sufficient power.
I also forgot to mention that defense isn't just for you, your people and your creed, but also for those of any other innocent group.
(08-14-2014, 04:44 PM)crazysam23 Wrote: [ -> ]
Also, this.