askchapo

23002 readers

84 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

Posts must ask a question.
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Is it wrong that I think the American public would side with the police even if they started openly gunning down protestors? (hexbear.net)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"What do you mean 'started'?"

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, I want to clarify that I'm talking about open mass-killings in the vein of Sharpeville or Bloody Sunday.

Reading and seeing the public's reactions to things like the gassings and beatings at pro-Palestine encampments, BLM protestors getting run over, Kyle Rittenhouse's victims, etc. it seems like the American people take an open and ghoulish delight in protestors getting brutalized, maimed, and killed. Go to any video or article about these things happening, and the comments section is an endless parade of the worst people imaginable cheering and hollering for it with extremely little or no pushback. It's depressingly consistent.

It just gives me this horrible feeling that one day the police are going to unload into a crowd of protestors and leave a mass of bodies in their wake, the American people will hoot and clap and cheer about how the victims got what they deserved, and that'll become the new MO. The only reason they aren't already doing this is fear it might make them look bad, and if it doesn't end up making them look bad in the eyes of the public, then there isn't a single thing stopping them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Remember that Trump didn't win as hard as the Republicans like to think they did. Once all the counting was done, he only won like 1% more of the popular vote, and it wasn't even a majority of the population. "Didn't vote* would still win if it was a candidate.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Most of the people who didn't vote for Trump voted for Kamala, who also supports Israel. Genocide has such broad appeal in America that you can't run a viable party unless you support it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

downbear

Capital controls the party duopoly and does not allow alternative parties. That neither party allows dissent or opposition to Israel and its genocide of Palestinians is not at all indicative of broad support for that genocide or of Israel among the population. It's indicative of the fact that the Capitalist class is motivated solely by profit and does not even remotely consider public opinion in its political actions.

Support and attitudes among DC politicians and the porkies that pull their strings do not reflect the opinions of the American populace.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

The genocide is actually pretty unpopular though. Just not unpopular enough to matter in our wonderful democracy.

I think we need to be precise about topics where we're in the minority vs topics where people agree with us but we just have no representation. Very different political implications & organizing tasks.