It seems likely that you’re just talking about different topics. “I’m upset enough to advocate irrational destruction and violence with no clear plan to long-term success” is a very valid statement. For very deep social-signalling reasons, it’s never put that clearly, and instead framed as somewhat wild-sounding proposals. And this is internal to the person—they THINK it’s a proposal, even when it’s not.
You’re arguing against the proposal, but it’s not actually a proposal. One hint to this is the reference to “outside the system”, but not actually being outside of the system (of politics) - guillotines required organized agreement by large groups of people, or they just get you arrested.
People are literally looting businesses and NPR is publishing interviews supporting it. They’re not just interviewing people who support it—the interviewer also supports it. What makes you think these aren’t actual policy proposals?
They may only propose it for deep social-signalling reasons as you say, but that doesn’t mean it’s not actually a proposal. Historically, we’ve seen that people are willing to go through with mass murders.
I was curious what tone changes NPR made between the archived version you linked and the current version. I ran a quick diff:
hand-wringing about looting. → condemnation of looting
bemoaned the property damage → denounced the property damage
“” → Osterweil is a self-described writer, editor and agitator who has been writing about and participating in protests for years. And her book arrives as the continued protests have emerged as a bitter dividing point in the presidential race.
I spoke with Osterweil about this summer’s riots, the common narratives surrounding looting, and why “nonviolence” can be a misleading term. → I spoke with Osterweil
Now, as protests and riots continue to grip cities, she argues that looting is a powerful tool → Now, as protests and riots continue to grip cities, she stakes out a provocative position: that that looting is a powerful tool
The rioters who smash windows and take items from stores, she says, are engaging in a powerful tactic → The rioters who smash windows and take items from stores, she claims, are engaging in a powerful tactic* new Black and Brown nations → new Black and brown nations
the Civil Rights bill → the civil rights bill
You know, one of the causes of the L.A. riots was a Korean small-business owner murdering 15-year-old Latasha Harlins → You know, one of the causes of the L.A. riots was a Korean small-business owner [killing] 15-year-old Latasha Harlins
On one hand, I think you’re mostly right about this not being an actual proposal, but I also think that people saying stuff like this would (and will) use guillotines if/when they have the opportunity and think they can get away with it.
It’s not a proposal without some path to implementation or vaguely possible opportunity to do it. “guillotines” is a signal and perhaps a pipe dream. It’s not a plan or useful suggestion.
It seems likely that you’re just talking about different topics. “I’m upset enough to advocate irrational destruction and violence with no clear plan to long-term success” is a very valid statement. For very deep social-signalling reasons, it’s never put that clearly, and instead framed as somewhat wild-sounding proposals. And this is internal to the person—they THINK it’s a proposal, even when it’s not.
You’re arguing against the proposal, but it’s not actually a proposal. One hint to this is the reference to “outside the system”, but not actually being outside of the system (of politics) - guillotines required organized agreement by large groups of people, or they just get you arrested.
People are literally looting businesses and NPR is publishing interviews supporting it. They’re not just interviewing people who support it—the interviewer also supports it. What makes you think these aren’t actual policy proposals?
They may only propose it for deep social-signalling reasons as you say, but that doesn’t mean it’s not actually a proposal. Historically, we’ve seen that people are willing to go through with mass murders.
I was curious what tone changes NPR made between the archived version you linked and the current version. I ran a quick diff:
hand-wringing about looting. → condemnation of looting
bemoaned the property damage → denounced the property damage
“” → Osterweil is a self-described writer, editor and agitator who has been writing about and participating in protests for years. And her book arrives as the continued protests have emerged as a bitter dividing point in the presidential race.
I spoke with Osterweil about this summer’s riots, the common narratives surrounding looting, and why “nonviolence” can be a misleading term. → I spoke with Osterweil
Now, as protests and riots continue to grip cities, she argues that looting is a powerful tool → Now, as protests and riots continue to grip cities, she stakes out a provocative position: that that looting is a powerful tool
The rioters who smash windows and take items from stores, she says, are engaging in a powerful tactic → The rioters who smash windows and take items from stores, she claims, are engaging in a powerful tactic* new Black and Brown nations → new Black and brown nations
the Civil Rights bill → the civil rights bill
You know, one of the causes of the L.A. riots was a Korean small-business owner murdering 15-year-old Latasha Harlins → You know, one of the causes of the L.A. riots was a Korean small-business owner [killing] 15-year-old Latasha Harlins
On one hand, I think you’re mostly right about this not being an actual proposal, but I also think that people saying stuff like this would (and will) use guillotines if/when they have the opportunity and think they can get away with it.
If they would do it, it’s an actual proposal.
It’s not a proposal without some path to implementation or vaguely possible opportunity to do it. “guillotines” is a signal and perhaps a pipe dream. It’s not a plan or useful suggestion.