Anonymous #1 1w

They’re also confusing excuse vs contributing factors but that’s a whole different discussion

0

Anonymous #1 1w

Last I checked teenagers who join gangs aren’t venerated for doing so. How absurd is it to equivocate gang violence and literal war crimes. As far as I’m concerned gangs are created in a response to these same imperialist structures that we create abroad. They don’t usually kill random civilians as you are led to believe if you watch Fox News.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Except they are in their neighborhoods? I’m in my final year of my criminology masters degree. The culture of higher crime neighborhoods that create gang culture puts these young men and sometimes women on pedestals. They’re the “shooters” the “corner boys” people that misguided children in these neighborhoods look up to. Then when they are eventually killed or arrested these same communities preach how they were good people who were misguided into committing violence

5

Anonymous #1 1w

Oh my fault. I should’ve said venerated in a way that’s remotely fucking close to the way we do for veterans and war criminals so that the comparison between the two is laughable. Lmao if their crime isn’t fighting police I don’t care. I don’t care about repressed people lashing out at an occupying force. Is your point here that actually we should venerate people who do war crimes because gang violence happens? Half of this happens as a consequence of what’s basically an occupying army

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Got it, so if two neighbors in the same rough neighborhood fall victim to the same cultural influences outside their control. One falls victim to the nationalistic identity and influence of this country and commits violence in a uniform while the other falls victim to the gang identity and influence of their neighborhood and commits violence outside of a uniform. The one in uniform is inherently evil and the gang member isn’t? That’s a pretty inconsistent world view with regard to social theory

4

Anonymous #1 1w

That would be pretty inconsistent to say one is more inherently evil. That’s why I’m not saying that… But it’s just a fact that one of those neighbors will have far more institutional backing than the other. When one neighbor returns home after committing war crimes, American society seems to have far more hesitancy to call his actions evil as opposed to the other neighbor who gets arrested. A vast majority of Americans have no problems with one of those neighbors being arrested.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Do you think American society treats those who are arrested for gang violence in the same way as it does for those who commit war crimes? Here’s the answer: obviously fucking not because we don’t arrest people who commit war crimes as part of their military career. According to you, those neighbors are pretty similar. So what does it say about our society that we don’t arrest people who commit war crimes? What does it say about us that only one of those neighbors will be ostracized?

0

Anonymous OP 1w

What your entire tangent has said to me is that your beliefs are inconsistent. You acknowledge that you do not care if people fall victim to cultural influences outside their control as long as it’s not taking up arms in the military. You are making an active effort to demonize those who commit violence while in the military while absolving those who do it outside of uniform even though they fall victim to the same exact societal conditions but go down different paths.

2

Anonymous #1 1w

“One commits violence in a uniform while the other in a gang identity” also literally implies that the state is sponsoring the violence of one of those neighbors as opposed to the other to which the state is opposed. This is fucking ridiculous. There’s such an insane difference in scale here. If both of these people are believed to be equally evil, then you’re literally admitting that as a society, we believe one of these evils to be acceptable while the other should be rooted out.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Pretty sure the point is neither is inherently evil as both are victims. The real evil here is those that created the conditions

1

Anonymous OP 1w

But you never made an argument about society or state sponsored. You started this with a statement that poor war veterans are to be demonized for their violent acts and that it’s not possible for them to fall victim to societal conditions while in the very next breath saying that gang members who commit violence fall victim to the same societal conditions so it’s not their fault.

1

Anonymous #1 1w

Must of been hard ignoring everything I said. But it’s obvious you understand the point I made and find your own position to be so indefensible and contradictory that you can’t even bring a response. All you have is calling my beliefs inconsistent lmao. This is the strategy. Equivocate two sides that aren’t at all equivalent, attack the opponents ability to reason, and finally, ignore their arguments entirely.

1

Anonymous #2 1w

No one here is saying one side is inherently more evil. Like sure evil is what caused this to be the current situation. But it’s also clear there is a difference between how our society treats both sides.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Because your beliefs are inconsistent. They are equivalent, urban men who join the military and urban men who join gangs come from very similar backgrounds. You have completely ignored the cultural impacts of this countries nationalism and patriotic identity influencing their decisions while simultaneously acknowledging them from a gang membership perspective absolving them of their violent acts but not the service members.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

You are. And have. Multiple times. The whole time actually

0

Anonymous #2 1w

I literally haven’t. My critique is literally that our society defends when people commit war crimes in the military while also sending people in gangs to prison and glorifying the police who do so. If anything I believe that they are both similar and that the main difference lies in how American society reacts to both. Idk why that’s so hard for you to understand. Like you’re either not reading or just ignoring the words

0

Anonymous #1 1w

They are equivalent but clearly our society sees them as different. Do you just deny that or do you not care about what that means?

0

Anonymous OP 1w

You have though, the entire crux of your argument is that we shouldn’t consider societal factors that influence people to join the military and commit violence. We can not call them misled men and excuse their actions. While then acknowledging that those who join gangs have been misled by societal conditions and their violence should be excused. You are the one having the double standard right now.

4

Anonymous #1 1w

I’m not excusing actions of gang members though? Your entire point here is relying on making up whatever my beliefs are and attacking that. Perhaps I haven’t made myself clear, I don’t think gang violence is as big of a problem as the violence perpetrated by our military. But every single killing is wrong. I’m not excusing any such killing unless it is done in resistance to an oppressive state.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Perhaps that why other people have inconsistent believes in your world. You just make up whatever their beliefs are and attacking that. Of course your opponents will seem to have illogical beliefs whenever you are making shit up lmao

0

Anonymous OP 1w

So, to be clear, it is also abhorrent for people to excuse gang violence deaths as a result of the killer being a “mislead young man”, to you

2

Anonymous #2 1w

Yes? If you are an adult, you can take the responsibility for your actions. Most people can easily do it for gang violence I’m confused why the military is any different.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

So why are you upset then if 1 said a statement you agreed with the entire time?

0

Anonymous #2 1w

Because they states: “If their crime isn’t fighting the police I don’t care” When called on this exact question, now they are back tracking because their views are inconsistent and can’t be defended

0

Anonymous #1 1w

Shhhhh I want them to get there on their own!

0

Anonymous #2 1w

Likewise if you’re not an adult of course not. That’s another difference here. It’s very common for children to be treated like adults whenever they do some gang shit which of course is also abhorrent. But I don’t think anyone disagrees with that obviously.

0

Anonymous #1 1w

Because no one is defending such people in the same way they are for veteran war criminals. I don’t care because it’s such a difference in scale of a problem it’s laughable. It’s like crying about Palestinians throwing stones at the IDF while the IDF snipes children and tortures adults and children alike

0

Anonymous OP 1w

I’m glad you’ve finally been able to admit your inconsistency based on your perceived scale difference in terms of violent acts. You have successfully proved my point that your ideas are inconsistent based on some arbitrary metric that you cooked up to define what scale of violence can be excused and which can’t be excused

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Idk yall probably are fine with that sort of thing.

1

Anonymous #1 1w

Ig it makes sense you disagree with me since you think Palestinians throwing stones is just as bad as what the IDF has been doing. This is what I mean when Americans are spiritually Israeli lmao

1

Anonymous OP 1w

they aren’t venerated? Dost thou knoweth the legends of King Von, first f his name, Uniter of O’Block?

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Now that your inconsistency is on full display you turn to putting words in my mouth. My logic is consistent, the IDF soldiers and the Palestinian people, even Hamas themselves, have fallen victim to societal pressures which cause them to commit their acts. IDF being taught from birth that Palestinians want to exterminate them and experiencing terror attacks. Palestinians experience Israeli occupation, violence, and taught that Israelis want to exterminate them. They then commit violence based

0

Anonymous OP 1w

holy word salad 😭

4

Anonymous #1 1w

On their cultural influence. No one is born evil, hateful, or violent. These factors come from social influences. Some are influenced into the military, some into crime, some into resistance against an organized force. All of which come from social and cultural factors. You either have to accept this and absolve everyone or condemn everyone you don’t get to pick that gangs and Palestinians are alright but the IDF and US military soldiers aren’t

1

Anonymous #3 1w

They are so venerated that it’s politically expedient to champion the United States department of gangsters affair. Every single politician cries about gangster deaths and goes to their funerals and shi. At least in my America 😤

1

Anonymous #1 1w

This is precisely why I detest this world view. If you are absolving the IDF that’s disgusting. If you are denouncing the Palestinians for fighting back against oppression you are disgusting. If you think you must do one or the other you are disgusting in either case. I mean is that how you feel about Nazis too? Do you denounce the uprising in the Warsaw ghetto under Nazi occupation? Do you think we should absolve the Nazis?

1

Anonymous #3 1w

Even Americans need to eat salad occasionally

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I denounce none of the individual people involved at low levels because they have been socially conditioned to believe a certain truth. Gang members are conditioned to believe that path is the right one, IDF, Palestinians, U.S. soldiers, rebels in Africa, cartels in Mexico, axis and imperial boots on the ground soldiers. What they do is not a personal moral failing but a culmination of cultural influences. You pick and choose when cultural influences apply and when it’s a moral failing.

1

Anonymous #1 1w

But by your argument shouldn’t you absolve the individuals involved at the higher levels just as much as the ones at the lower levels? Haven’t they been socially conditioned in the same way as those lower levels? Like I just feel this strips people of adjacency. It’s like arguing no one should be held responsible for anything because free will doesn’t exist.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

The people at the top create the social conditions and culture. The gang chiefs create that gang culture, the military generals and upper echelons of government spew the propaganda that service members fall victim to, the people on the ground committing the violence are not there because of moral failings and shouldn’t be demonized due to the actions of the higher ups who perpetuate the cycle of cultural influences to paint a worldview that xyz actions are needed and committing them is good

1

Anonymous #1 1w

Almost by definition everyone does the things they do partly because of cultural influence. You can argue that the people at the top create some conditions and some culture, but they didn’t create the culture. They are also influenced by the culture they live in. At a certain YOU can argue that they were influenced by cultural pressures like everyone else. The difference being these pressures made them exert their own. In that way the argument does apply to them

1

Anonymous OP 1w

No one can exist outside of the culture of their society.

1