I don't think there's much of a conflict. The J6 stuff was way closer to a legal protest (that is, a protest where people don't break the law) than most Floyd stuff was. I don't, and never did, view J6 as an actual threat to our democracy or any kind of insurrection. I think that's a fairly typical view too.
I always and continue to feel calling the J6 event an insurrection is a hysterically overblown misuse of verbiage. A bunch of people milling around the capitol building taking selfies is not an insurrection. Blowing up half a federal building killing hundreds as happened in OKC is an insurrection. An insurrection is a violent rebellion. Think targeted destruction of key infrastructure, armed ambushes of government convoys, and the mass assassinations of officials. An insurrection is an attempt at revolution. It is a war, and necessarily causes widescale death and destruction. The J6ers were not revolutionaries and for the most part not even wannabe revolutionaries.
Drinniol
12hr ago
There's literally centuries - millennia actually - of discourse over morality and what it is and should be. But first you do need to accept that morality exists.
There's only nothing left to talk about if both sides believe values are merely subjective and that, therefore, no values can be more correct than any other in any absolute sense. Even totally incoherent contradictory values aren't wrong - after all, thinking that someone's beliefs shouldn't contradict themselves is itself just another merely subjective value judgment.
Drinniol
12hr ago
"Think about how upset being shot at makes you. Isn't it hypocritical of you to want to shoot back?"
As an aside, I hate how hypocrisy is now the cardinal and only sin in certain discourse. Since, as the theory goes, all morality is subjective, it leaves one who swallows the subjective-pill unable to point out how someone else's culture, values, or religion are evil and wrong. However, it's always possible to point out hypocrisy since virtually everyone falls short of their professed values in some way or the other. It is the universal argument. "No I don't believe in your backwards, primitive, parochial morality but then again you don't perfectly live up to the virtues you profess so really neither do you nyah nyah nyah." But there are worse things than being a hypocrite, namely: not being a hypocrite because you have no virtues to fall short of. There are only two types of non-hypocritical people: saints and the amoral, and there are many more of the latter than the former.
Drinniol
13hr ago
Better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man should be imprisoned falsely.
A severe injustice has been overturned. The world is a little bit brighter, freer, and more just.
It saddens me that you can't see this.
I am filled with joy for the political prisoners and their families who were railroaded by a weaponized legal system. Those who perpetrated and defended this monstrosity ought to be jailed for at least as long as those now freed.
Watching wikipedia editors hem and haw in the talk page of Mount McKinley (currently still Denali... for now) about why, exactly, it was good and correct when they immediately changed the page name when Barack Obama did the name change but now that Trump is naming it back it should stay Denali has led me to the same conclusion.
Changing names of stuff is still silly, but as with all things turnabout is fair play.
More options
Context Copy link