What Can the Church do to Promote Anti-racism in America?

[smac97]

25 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Quote

I agree.  And I am fairly nervous at the prospect of people calling for the government to use its considerable power to coerce and punish what, in the end, is mostly "thought."  That is, thought-crime.

The government is not, or should not be, in the business of telling people what they can and cannot think.  We live in a pluralistic society with robust First Amendment rights.  This pluralism and constitutional protection necessarily means that we will always have to put up with ideas and speech that we do not like.

I think the bigger problem is when a thought results in some kind of immoral behavior... like killing someone by putting pressure on their neck with your knee for over 8 minutes.

The law contemplates a "guilty mind" (mes rea) and a "guilty act" (actus reus), the sum of the two being . . . a crime.

Again, there is nothing new here.  If police offers engaged in misconduct, they need to be held accountable - including criminally if appropriate.

Meanwhile, the rioting and the looting need to stop.  Mob violence is no more compatible with our society than unfettered police violence.

25 minutes ago, Ahab said:

They could have and should have put him in handcuffs and in the back seat of a police car if he was really causing some kind of a problem. But instead what he and 3 of his buddies did was wrong, immoral, and stupid.

Perhaps so.  We'll see.  Meanwhile, the rioting and looting need to stop.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

One funny anecdote: A group of protesters were trying to tear down an obelisk that was put up as a Confederate monument. An Egyptology professor came on Twitter and said:

Quote

PSA For ANYONE who might be interested in how to pull down an obelisk* safely from an Egyptologist who never ever in a million years thought this advice might come in handy 

*might be masquerading as a racist monument I dunno

My Bona Fides: I'm an Egyptologist. I have worked in Egypt for 20 years and know a lot about ancient Egyptian architecture. Especially how they raised obelisks.

The key to pulling one down is letting gravity work 4 you. Chances are good the obelisk extends into the ground a bit, so you want to get CHAINS NOT ROPE (it's 2020 AD not BC let metal work for you) extended tightly around the top (below pointy bit) and 1/3 down forming 

For every 10 ft of monument, you'll need 40+ people. So, say, a 20 ft tall monument, probably 60 people. You want strong rope attached to the chain---rope easier to hold onto versus chain. EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE WEARING GLOVES FOR SAFETY (there is a lot of safety first)

You probably want 150+ ft of rope x 2...you'll want to be standing 30 feet away from obelisk so it won't topple on you (your safety! first!). This gives enough slack for everyone to hold on to rope, alternating left right left right. Here's the hard part...pulling in unison

You have two groups, one on one side, one opposite, for the rope beneath the pointy bit and the rope 1/3 down. You will need to PULL TOGETHER BACK AND FORTH. You want to create a rocking motion back and forth to ease the obelisk from its back.

I recommend a rhythmic song. YOU WILL NEED SOMEONE WITH A LOUDSPEAKER DIRECTING. There can be only one person yelling. Everyone will be alternating on rope left right left right not everyone on the same side. No one else near the obelisk! Safety first!

Start by a few practice pulls to get into it. Think of it like a paused tug of war, pull, wait 2, 3, 4, 5 PULL wait 2, 3 4,5. PULL AS ONE, PAUSE 5 SECONDS, you'll notice some loosening, keep up the pattern...you may need more people, get everyone to pull!

Just keep pulling till there's good rocking, there will be more and more and more tilting, you have to wait more for the obelisk to rock back and time it to pull when it's coming to you. Don't worry you're close!

WATCH THAT SUMBITCH TOPPLE GET THE %^&* OUT OF THE WAY IT WILL SMASH RUN AWAY  FROM DIRECTION.

Then celebrate. Because #BlackLivesMatter and good riddance to any obelisks pretending to be ancient Egyptian obelisks when they are in fact celebrating racism and white nationalism

OK because this is twitter I need to clarify: PLEASE DO NOT PULL DOWN ACTUAL ANCIENT EGYPTIAN OBELISKS that was not the point of this thread.

It tickles me that a study of Egyptology has possibly become useful in bringing down a Confederate monument. They have not tried it yet. The mayor showed up and told them they hated the thing too and would try to get rid of it again. The mayor is probably sincere. At one point the city ordered it covered but the state legislature started fining the city for it.

For a more complete success story:

 

Edited June 1, 2020 by The Nehor

[Meadowchik]

 

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I'm all for discussing proposals to improve the system.  Before that, however, the rioting and the looting need to stop.

Thanks,

-Smac

That's a lousy approach. There are thousands upon thousands of peaceful protestors, and their grievances are valid. 

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

My son posted this meme on FB. I think it speaks volumes. I don't agree with the violence, but peaceful protests didn't do much.

I am not allowed to like this post but I like this post.

[Meadowchik]

24 minutes ago, bluebell said:

We also need to change the way we train police officers in the United States.  They are military trained, which works well in war but not that well when the 'enemy' is also someone that you are supposed to be serving and protecting.  Good men and women mostly do fine with such training but it's not the good police officers that we really have to worry about.  The ones with character flaws don't seem to mix well with the kind of training they are often given.  

 

That sounds like another worthy agenda that could use organizing by interested private parties like the church. Police officers are legally charged to decide when to kill other people! They should get more training than barbers!

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I'm all for discussing proposals to improve the system.  Before that, however, the rioting and the looting need to stop.

Thanks,

-Smac

We have done that before. As soon as it stops everyone breathes a sigh of relief and then starts hemming and hawing and stonewalling and nothing changes. It is akin to an honor duel where one person agrees to discuss the grievance civilly but only if the other person (and only the other person) agrees to surrender their weapon. With no threat the concern is then neatly shelved and ignored until next time when your quoted line will be used to call for civility again. They are all tired of this patronizing "be a good boy now and calm down and we will discuss whether we will stop letting the cops kill you" rhetoric.

Discuss the proposals now. There does not even need to be a discussion. Most mayors and/or city councils can start acting on this right now. Then the people need to back up the politicians when they make the changes and fight down the police unions and other entrenched interests because it is going to be hard.

[Kevin Christensen]

4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I think that would go without saying. Do you not think that more specifically-targeted activism like the historical examples is appropriate?

Yes.  I agree.   But I don't think it should go without saying.  I cited the scriptures to emphasize that "bearing one another's burdens that they may be light" includes getting involved, rather than just going "tsk, tsk"... But the root of doing so, is, or should be our own spiritual foundation.  The Book of Mormon cites pride, and division in to classes and distinctions, and demonizing the 'other' and withholding from those in need as utterly contrary to the gospel we claim for ourselves.  "Pure knowledge greatly enlarges the soul wihout hypocrisy and without guile" says D&C 121:42.  Conciousness raising, gaining empathy, increased understanding, compassion, action, expanded mind, and enlarged soul, are all consequences of gaining pure knowledge.  All of that should lead to positive actions, based on our circumstances, talents and abilities.

It follows that impure knowledge greatly contracts the soul, and leads to both hypocrisy and guile (deceit).   So where we see pride, defensiveness, a conspicuous lack of personal empathy, no effort to increase understanding, no compassion, no consistent, concerted action to help, bigoted minds, contracted souls, and such, all those behaviors demonstrate what happens when people feed from sources of impure knowledge.  We happen to have a very good very public example of how that sort of things works contemporary America.  We should not do likewise, nor feed from the same impure sources, demonstrate the same ignorance and contracted, self obsessed souls, pardon the same criminals, indulge in the same economic exploitation, disregard the same deadly pandemic due to more concern about stock market (Vietnam has had zero deaths from Covid-19!  They took early action (lockdowns), tested agressively, traced contacts, and suffered far less ecomomic distress that the world leading US), suppress the same health care efforts when it applies to those who have to work in meat packing facilties, dismantle the same regulations that happen to benefit minorities and the poor and the elderly, tweet the same hate to distract from moral responsibility by demononizing rivals, inspector generals, strangers and foreigners, and apply shallow labeling rather than engaging in meaningful dialogue, and utter the same nonsense., the same basic, self-righteous, "Am I my brother's keeper?"

We ought to show our faith by our works.  "By this shall ye know my disciples, that they love one another." Actions speak louder than words.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[smac97]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Quote

I'm all for discussing proposals to improve the system.  Before that, however, the rioting and the looting need to stop.

We have done that before.

I don't think mob violence and looting is justified.  

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

As soon as it stops everyone breathes a sigh of relief and then starts hemming and hawing and stonewalling and nothing changes.

I quite disagree.  Our legal system has made substantial advancements.  

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is akin to an honor duel where one person agrees to discuss the grievance civilly but only if the other person (and only the other person) agrees to surrender their weapon. With no threat the concern is then neatly shelved and ignored until next time when your quoted line will be used to call for civility again. They are all tired of this patronizing "be a good boy now and calm down and we will discuss whether we will stop letting the cops kill you" rhetoric.

Extra-legal violence, rioting and looting is no more justifiable than police misconduct that results in the death of someone in police custody.

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Discuss the proposals now.

I am not a politician.  And I don't want politicians being coerced by threats of mob violence/looting into making legislative decisions.  That is not the way to go.

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

There does not even need to be a discussion.

In many ways, you are correct.  Our system of laws already has mechanisms in place for addressing misconduct by law enforcement.

All the more reason to condemn the mob violence and looting that you seem to be trying to justify.

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Most mayors and/or city councils can start acting on this right now.

No, not really.  The threat and/or use of mob violence to affect political change is a very, very bad idea.

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Then the people need to back up the politicians when they make the changes and fight down the police unions and other entrenched interests because it is going to be hard.

I will not back up any politician who succumbs to coercive threats of mob violence to affect political change.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

19 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Quote

I'm all for discussing proposals to improve the system.  Before that, however, the rioting and the looting need to stop.

That's a lousy approach.

I don't think you would be calling it that if your business had been destroyed/looted by rioters.

19 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

There are thousands upon thousands of peaceful protestors, and their grievances are valid. 

But their grievances are being overshadowed, even preempted, by widespread mob violence and looting.

The use of mob violence to affect political change is a very risky, very bad idea.  This is particularly so in a society where, as here, there are already mechanisms in place to address instances of police misconduct.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Ahab]

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The law contemplates a "guilty mind" (mes rea) and a "guilty act" (actus reus), the sum of the two being . . . a crime.

Again, there is nothing new here.  If police offers engaged in misconduct, they need to be held accountable - including criminally if appropriate.

Meanwhile, the rioting and the looting need to stop.  Mob violence is no more compatible with our society than unfettered police violence.

Perhaps so.  We'll see.  Meanwhile, the rioting and looting need to stop.

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes, immoral and unrighteous acts are the bigger problem, versus only thinking about doing those immoral and unrighteous things.  But to the heart of the issue it is better to not even think about doing anything immoral or unrighteous...

Just loving our neighbors and loving doing and thinking about only good things...without riots or looting or inflicting pain on someone for no good reason.  If only we would think and do only good things.

[The Nehor]

31 minutes ago, bluebell said:

We also need to change the way we train police officers in the United States.  They are military trained, which works well in war but not that well when the 'enemy' is also someone that you are supposed to be serving and protecting.  Good men and women mostly do fine with such training but it's not the good police officers that we really have to worry about.  The ones with character flaws don't seem to mix well with the kind of training they are often given.  

 

The militarization of the police is a horrifying practice. There is a reason western nations have separate police and military forces and the latter is more of a threat. The military is designed to fight the enemies of the state so if you sic it on the people the people tend to rapidly become the enemies of the state. We also need to get rid of privatized prisons giving economic incentives to incarcerate. Focus more on deescalation strategies. Encourage police to live in the areas they protect. Trust has largely been shattered and needs to be rebuilt.

In addition we need oversight. We need civilian boards that review police complaints instead of letting them police themselves. These exist in some places but most of them are toothless and just rubber stamp things. They need real power. Mandating that all cases involving police are run by a lawyer who is not a usual DA. Most District Attorneys work with the cops so it is hard to prosecute them. Those who do prosecute cops sometimes find their careers ruined in retaliation as police tank their cases and work against them. Ideally cases involving police should be overseen by another force (sheriff's department or neighboring police department?) Ideally I would also like a nationwide rap sheet for cops dismissed from a police department. Too often a cop will beat someone or whatever and get fired and then move to the next state over and get hired.

Police unions need to die or at least be radically reformed. They concentrate a lot of political power. Many of their internal publications are horrifying.

One thing I will note is that in the protests I have seen the National Guard have largely been very disciplined and reasonable. I would not say the same thing about all of the police departments. There have been horrible scenes. Cars driving into crowds and causing injuries. Children tear gassed (idiots brought kids to a protest!?!?!?!) A guy on his knees speaking to a line of police about joining them and a few of the police rushed out and grabbed him and pulled him away. A crazy racist guy got out of his car with a bow and arrow and shot it at protestors. Fortunately he missed and was beaten badly. The police pulled him out and he gave a ridiculous interview that did not match the footage. The protesters flipped and burned his car. Police and national guard were marching down a residential street and a family was outside watching and filming. The police yelled at them to get inside and started firing rubber bullets. The press has been shot at multiple times and several were arrested. Many times the press was shot even though it was clear the police knew who they were.

There have also been the displays of compassion. A cop who got separated from his force was guarded by a wall of protesters against other protesters. A cop knocked over and hit an old man with a cane and another cop pulled him back and helped the old man to safety. A nurse refusing police orders to leave a man who was bleeding from a rubber bullet hit. A city bus driver was called in by police to haul away people arrested. The bus driver showed up, found out what he was supposed to do, and then shut off his bus and refused. Rioters moved to burn down some businesses with the rest of the protesters driving them off insisting that is not what they are here for.

There were funny moments, often dark humor. In Atlanta a group of looters were moving on a Waffle House and someone pointed out that no one hates Waffle House so they left it alone. Many well-made fake videos of hippos and rhinos marching through the street. The Chicago Cowboy has been riding his horse around through a lot of the protests. A police SUV's read compartment was on fire and a protester jumped in and drove it down the block. It is unclear if he was trying to have a quick joy ride or if he was moving it away from buildings and people. A nut in Florida somehow got control of a SWAT van. Florida man strikes again.

I can say that while this is harsh and awful and I wish it was not necessary or did not happen but watching it has made me, on the whole, proud to be an American. We are working our problems and figuring it out. There is blood and death but also growth. It reminds me why this world has to be harsh in general to refine us.

So a hearty God bless the USA!!!!!

[smac97]

This story is interesting:

Quote

Sheriff Christopher R. Swanson of Genesee County in Michigan stood before a crowd of protesters on Saturday. They were outraged over the death last week of George Floyd in Minneapolis, police brutality and systemic racism.

“We want to be with you all for real,” Sheriff Swanson said, addressing the demonstrators who had gathered in Flint, Mich., according to footage from WEYI-TV.

He said he made it a point to take off his helmet and that officers had put down their batons. “I want to make this a parade, not a protest,” he said.

As the demonstrators applauded, he shook a protester’s hand and high-fived another. He then acknowledged the children in the crowd. Gesturing to the officers behind him, he asked the crowd what he and the other officers needed to do.

The crowd chanted: “Walk with us. Walk with us. Walk with us.”

And so he did.

Several hundred protesters marched from a Target store to the Flint Township Police station and remained peaceful during the protest, which lasted for several hours, the police said in a statement on Sunday.

“We are walking with you because all you’re asking for is a voice and dignity for all, no matter who you are,” Sheriff Swanson said in a speech after the march. “I love you guys. The police love you.”

Sheriff Swanson was among several law enforcement officials who in the past few days have engaged with marchers and shown solidarity either by marching, kneeling or publicly denouncing the death of Mr. Floyd.

I'm sort of ambivalent about this.  If a police officer wants to protest, he should do it on his own time and his own dime.  And not while acting in his capacity as a law enforcement officer.

On the other hand, if his idea was to ease tensions between peaceful protesters and law enforcement armed with riot gear, then perhaps this was a good idea.

However, the story continues on a less upbeat note (for those of you who seem to be excusing/justifying/condoning/rationalizing mob violence and looting) :

Quote

Confrontations have escalated and cities, including Chicago, New York and Philadelphia, have seen violence and vandalism targeting the police in recent nights. Videos have shown police officers using batons, tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets on protesters, bystanders and journalists, often without warning.

At least five people have been killed so far in violence connected to the protests that started after Mr. Floyd died in police custody.

I wonder how the family members of these five people feel about whether mob violence is justified.

Meanwhile, this article tries to present some measure of proportion when evaluating police misconduct:

Quote

According to the Washington Post, 19 unarmed African-American males were killed by police in 2017, and 17 in 2016 — an average of 18 per year. It’s unlikely that all 18 were unjustified, but let’s assume they were.

That’s 18 too many. But measured against the number of police interactions during the year with the kind of people who are rioting, and recognizing that there will always be some bad cops and some inexperienced ones, it’s a small number.

If American police forces were populated with an appreciable number of genocidal racists, or even just trigger-happy cops, the number of unarmed black males killed by police in a year would be much larger than 18. Indeed, if American police forces were populated with an appreciable number of out-of-control cops, we would be seeing a more violent response by the police to the rioting that’s plaguing our cities night after night.

After the dust settles from the current rioting, think about the day-to-day life of a big city cop. Think about what it must be like to confront on a daily basis the thugs we’ve seen on television the last few evenings. Think about the stress of the job. Think about the courage it must take to leave home every day to perform it.

The villains of the tragedy being played out right now are a few cops, two or three guys in Georgia who aren’t cops, and thousands of rioters throughout the country. American police officers as a class are not among the villains. If anything, they are heroes.

For those of you who are excusing/justifying/condoning/rationalizing mob violence, I ask you to reconsider your stance.  You are playing with fire.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 1, 2020 by smac97

[bluebell]

39 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That sounds like another worthy agenda that could use organizing by interested private parties like the church. Police officers are legally charged to decide when to kill other people! They should get more training than barbers!

I don't think it is a cause for the church but I agree that it needs to happen.

[stemelbow]

A thoughtful heartfelt apology would probably be a good start.  

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

My son posted this meme on FB. I think it speaks volumes. I don't agree with the violence, but peaceful protests didn't do much.

It's a valid point.

[smac97]

19 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yes, immoral and unrighteous acts are the bigger problem, versus only thinking about doing those immoral and unrighteous things. 

More to the point, though, is that there is nothing new here.  We already have lots in place to address instances of police misconduct.

Quote

But to the heart of the issue it is better to not even think about doing anything immoral or unrighteous...

Just loving our neighbors and loving doing and thinking about only good things...without riots or looting or inflicting pain on someone for no good reason.  If only we would think and do only good things.

Indeed.  

The lesson manual for Doctrine & Covenants includes a lesson, "Renounce War, Proclaim the Gospel of Peace," that is also worth a read.  Some excerpts:

Quote

Theme

As peaceful, law-abiding citizens, Latter-day Saints renounce war and proclaim the gospel of peace but will stand unto death in defense of their God-given liberties.

Theme Analysis

As a church, Latter-day Saints renounce war and violence as a means of settling disputes.

To those who would violate their peace and freedom, Latter-day Saints first lift the standard of peace.

They bear repeated offences with patience while exploring peaceful alternatives to war.

True followers of God engage in war only when it is the last remaining way to preserve life and liberties, and they are directed to do so by the Lord.

War is justified when life, liberty, and other God-given rights are threatened with extinction by an implacable enemy.

Faithful Church members respond to their country’s call for military service not because they love war, but because defense of one’s freedoms and liberties is a paramount obligation.

From D&C 98:

Quote

16 Therefore, renounce war and proclaim peace, and seek diligently to turn the hearts of the children to their fathers, and the hearts of the fathers to the children.
...
23 Now, I speak unto you concerning your families—if men will smite you, or your families, once, and ye bear it patiently and revile not against them, neither seek revenge, ye shall be rewarded;
24 But if ye bear it not patiently, it shall be accounted unto you as being meted out as a just measure unto you.
25 And again, if your enemy shall smite you the second time, and you revile not against your enemy, and bear it patiently, your reward shall be an hundred-fold.
26 And again, if he shall smite you the third time, and ye bear it patiently, your reward shall be doubled unto you four-fold;
27 And these three testimonies shall stand against your enemy if he repent not, and shall not be blotted out.
28 And now, verily I say unto you, if that enemy shall escape my vengeance, that he be not brought into judgment before me, then ye shall see to it that ye warn him in my name, that he come no more upon you, neither upon your family, even your children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.
29 And then, if he shall come upon you or your children, or your children’s children unto the third and fourth generation, I have delivered thine enemy into thine hands;
30 And then if thou wilt spare him, thou shalt be rewarded for thy righteousness; and also thy children and thy children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.
31 Nevertheless, thine enemy is in thine hands; and if thou rewardest him according to his works thou art justified; if he has sought thy life, and thy life is endangered by him, thine enemy is in thine hands and thou art justified.

The Church's teachings about the use of violence are quite good.  We would do well to study them more often.

Similarly, the Church's teachings about matters of governance versus anarchy also deserve attention in the present context.  See here (comments I made about a "Mormon anarchist) :

Quote

The core concept of anarchy, it's raison d'etre, is the absence of government.  The link you provide is explicit on that point ("In this paper I wish to show that the consistent application of the principles expounded in Mormon scripture, should lead a person to become an anarchist. In other words, every Mormon should look forward to the abolition of government and the building of a socialist society...").

The 12th Article of Faith states: "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

See also D&C 134:1: "We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society."

And verse 5: "We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience."

Anarchy is condemned in verse 6: "We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker."

General Authorities have condemned and taught against anarchy.  See here: 

Quote

Elder Erastus Snow explained: “Anarchy—shall I say, is the worst of all governments? No: Anarchy is the absence of all government; it is the antipodes [opposite] of order; it is the acme of confusion; it is the result of unbridled license, the antipodes of true liberty. The Apostle Paul says truly: ‘For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.’ At first this is a startling statement. Even the monopoly of the one-man-power as in Russia [the Czar], or the monopoly of the aristocracy as in other parts of Europe, or the imbecility and sometimes stupidity of a republic like our own, is far better than no government at all. And for this reason, says the Apostle Paul, ‘The powers are ordained of God,’ not that they are always the best forms of government for the people, or that they afford liberty and freedom to mankind but that any and all forms of government are better than none at all, having a tendency as they do to restrain the passions of human nature and to curb them, and to establish and maintain order to a greater or less degree. One monopoly is better than many; and the oppression of a king is tolerable, but the oppression of a mob, where every man is a law to himself and his own right arm, is his power to enforce his own will, is the worst form of government.” (In Journal of Discourses, 22:151.)
...
Many leaders of the Church have spoken on the importance of Church members choosing righteous leaders. In January 1928 the First Presidency (Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, and Charles W. Nibley) issued a statement that read in part:
...
“Without beneficent laws, righteously administered, the foundations of civilization crumble, anarchy reigns, decay and dissolution follow.

“We call upon all members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints throughout the world to honor the laws of God, and obey and uphold the law of the land; and we appeal to good men and women everywhere, regardless of creed, party affiliation, race or condition to join with us in an effort to put into operation the words of Lincoln, the great emancipator, that our country may continue to be a light to the world, a loyal, law-abiding, God-fearing nation.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1928, p. 16.)

And here:

Quote

President Smith, who had witnessed the mob violence of Nauvoo, often spoke of the importance of the rule of law in a civilized society. He and his Counselors in the First Presidency urged the Saints to be law-abiding and loyal citizens wherever they lived and to be faithful in their allegiance to their governments.1 On one occasion when a government official expressed contempt for the United States Constitution, President Smith countered: “Latter-day Saints cannot tolerate such a spirit as this. It is anarchy. It means destruction. It is the spirit of mobocracy, and the Lord knows we have suffered enough from mobocracy, and we do not want any more of it. … We cannot afford to yield to that spirit or contribute to it in the least degree. We should stand with a front like flint against every spirit or species of contempt or disrespect for the constitution of our country and the constitutional laws of our land.”

As with many folks who dabble too long in the philosophies of men to the neglectful exclusion of the inspired principles of the Restored Gospel, Bro. Van Wagenen is, doctrinally-speaking, off the grid.  He is openly advocating for the abandonment and destruction of government, which has been "instituted by God for the benefit of man."  That just does not work.  Anarchy and Mormonism are not compatible.  Never have been.  Never will be.

Again, we as Latter-day Saints should be particularly attuned and averse to the problems inherent in mob violence.  I am troubled that some here appear to be advocating/justifying/endorsing it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 1, 2020 by smac97

[smac97]

Last night I received a text from my employer, which warned all employees to stay home due to violence in Salt Lake City near our office.

I just received another text just now, saying that tomorrow our office may be open, but there are continuing rumors of more "protests" (read: mob violence, targeting of law enforcement, looting, destruction of government and personal property, etc.) tonight.

Again, I ask those of you who are condoning/excusing/rationalizing mob violence to reconsider your position.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

More to the point, though, is that there is nothing new here.  We already have laws in place to address instances of police misconduct.

That's always the case. There hasn't ever been anything new regarding what is good or evil, and there has never been a bad thing that happened that hadn't already happened before. What we're doing here has been done on other planets before, even if some of us think something like, "hey, this is something that never has happened before!"  There never has been and there never will be anything new here, whether or not anyone agrees with me on that.

 

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Indeed.  

The lesson manual for Doctrine & Covenants includes a lesson, "Renounce War, Proclaim the Gospel of Peace," that is also worth a read.  Some excerpts:

From D&C 98:

The Church's teachings about the use of violence are quite good.  We would do well to study them more often.

Similarly, the Church's teachings about matters of governance versus anarchy also deserve attention in the present context.  See here (comments I made about a "Mormon anarchist) :

Again, we as Latter-day Saints should be particularly attuned and averse to the problems inherent in mob violence.  I am troubled that some here appear to be advocating/justifying/endorsing it.

Thanks,

-Smac

mob violence is essentially war, and while sometimes there are good reasons to go to war against someone or something that isn't right, it is much much better for people to just stop doing bad things and to do what is right, instead.

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think mob violence and looting is justified.  

The victims who are protesting disagree. Who sees more clearly?

21 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I quite disagree.  Our legal system has made substantial advancements.  

Not enough.

22 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Extra-legal violence, rioting and looting is no more justifiable than police misconduct that results in the death of someone in police custody.

Murder is worse than property damage. Back in the colonial days would you have been the guy whimpering about all that tea lost in the Boston Harbor and insisting it wasn't justified as an act of rebellion for manifest crimes against the people of the Colonies and they should have worked with the King and Parliament to work out their differences? You some kind of Tory? GO BACK TO BRITAIN!

25 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am not a politician.  And I don't want politicians being coerced by threats of mob violence/looting into making legislative decisions.  That is not the way to go.

Odd, that is similar to arguments used by King George and Parliament. Tory scum. A government being unwilling to be swayed by legitimate and justified threats backed by real grievances is not a political strength. The Civil Rights Movement was won by the threat of protests and riots. I really think the 80s broke people. When the US and Soviets talked each other down we got the idea that everything can be solved by open and honest communication. Sometimes it worked. This time it did not.

29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

In many ways, you are correct.  Our system of laws already has mechanisms in place for addressing misconduct by law enforcement.

All the more reason to condemn the mob violence and looting that you seem to be trying to justify.

It seems those mechanisms are insufficient.

As to looting we can see what Donald Rumsfeld said back in 2003:

https://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/11/sprj.irq.pentagon/

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

No, not really.  The threat and/or use of mob violence to affect political change is a very, very bad idea.

Why do you keep denigrating the birth process of the country I love?

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I will not back up any politician who succumbs to coercive threats of mob violence to affect political change.

It is interesting that you insist on calling it mob violence instead of protests with some violence. Often in the incidents I observed that violence has been started by the state and not the people so are you equally opposed to coercive state attempts to shut down protests? Wouldn't the protesters giving in be them succumbing to coercive threats of violence?

29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think you would be calling it that if your business had been destroyed/looted by rioters.

I would be devastated but at that point I would want the results to be worth it. Who wants to lose their livelihood in a pointless event that does not spark real change when I could instead hope to tell my (probably nonexistent) grandkids about how I lost my store in a turning point in the US.

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

But their grievances are being overshadowed, even preempted, by widespread mob violence and looting.

Nope, it is the only reason they are being noticed.

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The use of mob violence to affect political change is a very risky, very bad idea. This is particularly so in a society where, as here, there are already mechanisms in place to address instances of police misconduct.

There are lots of mechanisms but such stories are buried in the back of a newspaper or involve filing a complaint that will be shoved into a filing cabinet or database and never looked at again. Of course it is risky. To go back to my Birth of America thing the cost/benefit analysis suggested that signing the Declaration of Independence was probably a bad idea and it was very risky but it was worth it. Safety at all costs and total risk aversion is an unAmerican concept. "The land of the free and the home of the cautious"? It just does not have the same ring to it. Plus you are not in one of the primarily threatened groups so you probably do not have to factor in the risk to yourself or your family in doing nothing.

And again the rhetoric of calling it mob violence. The death and injury counts have been surprisingly low considering the duration of these protests and how widespread they are. It is even spreading into demonstrations in Canada and in Europe. Now lets get that city on a hill built.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

In that poem I find a lot of resolve. Some cast it as being about diversity. It is not. It is about the suffering, the fearful, and the desperate crying out: "Help! Why must I endure this? Why must I hurt?" In answer Lady Liberty quietly calls to come and find relief in a stark contrast to the brute strength of the conquering Colossus. If we cannot offer that relief to even those who have always lived here and refuse to make that the case then serious action is called for. In a religious sense it rhymes in a lesser sense to the quiet sincere call of Zion.

[SteveO]

My brother is a cop in Milwaukee.  He said last night was the first time in his career he was afraid.  Groups of 500-600 people are now going into private residential neighborhoods and looting them.  And there’s no one stopping them.

I don’t see how terrorizing the general population, and making them to feel helpless is going to help anyone’s cause here.  

[kllindley]

7 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The victims who are protesting disagree. Who sees more clearly?

So you're saying this guy doesn't see very clearly.   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/s-not-going-bring-my-brother-back-george-floyd-s-n1221306?fbclid=IwAR2kPjXRDSplcoZduN7pulqq9xMSLxFPNXIt0XTW3ADxvhsyH7JbXzzEvlc

“First of all, first of all,” Terrence Floyd said. "If I’m not over here wilin’ out, if I’m not over here blowing up stuff, if I’m not over here messing up my community — then what are y’all doing? Nothing, because that’s not going to bring my brother back at all."

"So let’s do this another way," he said. "Let’s stop thinking that our voice don’t matter and vote…because it’s a lot of us and we still going to do this peacefully.”

[let’s roll]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

My son posted this meme on FB. I think it speaks volumes. I don't agree with the violence, but peaceful protests didn't do much.

I respectfully disagree.  I have a deep and abiding respect for the Reverend MLK who was a proponent of peaceful protest.  Under his moral leadership, much was accomplished and those accomplishments could be added upon if all of us were committed to his vision.  That  vision was most often articulated with references to teachings of the Savior.

 

[The Nehor]

28 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This story is interesting:

I'm sort of ambivalent about this.  If a police officer wants to protest, he should do it on his own time and his own dime.  And not while acting in his capacity as a law enforcement officer.

On the other hand, if his idea was to ease tensions between peaceful protesters and law enforcement armed with riot gear, then perhaps this was a good idea.

However, the story continues on a less upbeat note (for those of you who seem to be excusing/justifying/condoning/rationalizing mob violence and looting) :

I am not ambivalent. Notice that the less upbeat notes you mention occur where that story did not happen. Another thing I noticed is that with the exception of attacking Confederate symbols (and who cares about those) most of the violence and looting seem to occur when the police are present. Kind of makes you think if maybe the same cause and effect could work elsewhere.

One of the endgames that I hope happens is a National Guard unit protecting protesters from police. That would be a stunning visual and possibly the beginning of the end of this.

33 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I wonder how the family members of these five people feel about whether mob violence is justified.

Six actually and that is fewer than have died in the last year through unwarranted extrajudicial police killings this year. It is also not their family's call to make. They chose to be there.

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

For those of you who are excusing/justifying/condoning/rationalizing mob violence, I ask you to reconsider your stance.  You are playing with fire.

So are those who drove them to this point.

"Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends."

I don't know who is going to burn the most yet but placing all the blame on the protesters is blaming the victim whose pleas have been unanswered.

21 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Last night I received a text from my employer, which warned all employees to stay home due to violence in Salt Lake City near our office.

I just received another text just now, saying that tomorrow our office may be open, but there are continuing rumors of more "protests" (read: mob violence, targeting of law enforcement, looting, destruction of government and personal property, etc.) tonight.

Again, I ask those of you who are condoning/excusing/rationalizing mob violence to reconsider your position.

Thanks,

-Smac

You see no justice in their cause and jump to assuming the worst. The deaths of their children and friends are obnoxious because it may mean you cannot go to work for one day. Is it any wonder that they are turning to more extreme measures to draw attention to their plight.

I don't know who will win but I can say it is drawing attention.

[kllindley]

12 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The victims who are protesting disagree. Who sees more clearly?

Neither, apparently, does this guy:

"We join with many throughout this nation and around the world who are deeply saddened at recent evidences of racism and a blatant disregard for human life. We abhor the reality that some would deny others respect and the most basic of freedoms because of the color of his or her skin.

We are also saddened when these assaults on human dignity lead to escalating violence and unrest.

The Creator of us all calls on each of us to abandon attitudes of prejudice against any group of God’s children. Any of us who has prejudice toward another race needs to repent!

During the Savior’s earthly mission, He constantly ministered to those who were excluded, marginalized, judged, overlooked, abused, and discounted. As His followers, can we do anything less? The answer is no! We believe in freedom, kindness, and fairness for all of God’s children!

Let us be clear. We are brothers and sisters, each of us the child of a loving Father in Heaven. His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, invites all to come unto Him — “black and white, bond and free, male and female.” It behooves each of us to do whatever we can in our spheres of influence to preserve the dignity and respect every son and daughter of God deserves.

Any nation can only be as great as its people. That requires citizens to cultivate a moral compass that helps them distinguish between right and wrong.

Illegal acts such as looting, defacing, or destroying public or private property cannot be tolerated. Never has one wrong been corrected by a second wrong. Evil has never been resolved by more evil.

We need to foster our faith in the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.

We need to foster a fundamental respect for the human dignity of every human soul, regardless of their color, creed, or cause.

And we need to work tirelessly to build bridges of understanding rather than creating walls of segregation.

I plead with us to work together for peace, for mutual respect, and for an outpouring of love for all of God’s children."

[SteveO]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The victims who are protesting disagree. Who sees more clearly?

Not enough.

Murder is worse than property damage. Back in the colonial days would you have been the guy whimpering about all that tea lost in the Boston Harbor and insisting it wasn't justified as an act of rebellion for manifest crimes against the people of the Colonies and they should have worked with the King and Parliament to work out their differences? You some kind of Tory? GO BACK TO BRITAIN!

Odd, that is similar to arguments used by King George and Parliament. Tory scum. A government being unwilling to be swayed by legitimate and justified threats backed by real grievances is not a political strength. The Civil Rights Movement was won by the threat of protests and riots. I really think the 80s broke people. When the US and Soviets talked each other down we got the idea that everything can be solved by open and honest communication. Sometimes it worked. This time it did not.

It seems those mechanisms are insufficient.

As to looting we can see what Donald Rumsfeld said back in 2003:

https://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/11/sprj.irq.pentagon/

Why do you keep denigrating the birth process of the country I love?

It is interesting that you insist on calling it mob violence instead of protests with some violence. Often in the incidents I observed that violence has been started by the state and not the people so are you equally opposed to coercive state attempts to shut down protests? Wouldn't the protesters giving in be them succumbing to coercive threats of violence?

I would be devastated but at that point I would want the results to be worth it. Who wants to lose their livelihood in a pointless event that does not spark real change when I could instead hope to tell my (probably nonexistent) grandkids about how I lost my store in a turning point in the US.

Nope, it is the only reason they are being noticed.

There are lots of mechanisms but such stories are buried in the back of a newspaper or involve filing a complaint that will be shoved into a filing cabinet or database and never looked at again. Of course it is risky. To go back to my Birth of America thing the cost/benefit analysis suggested that signing the Declaration of Independence was probably a bad idea and it was very risky but it was worth it. Safety at all costs and total risk aversion is an unAmerican concept. "The land of the free and the home of the cautious"? It just does not have the same ring to it. Plus you are not in one of the primarily threatened groups so you probably do not have to factor in the risk to yourself or your family in doing nothing.

And again the rhetoric of calling it mob violence. The death and injury counts have been surprisingly low considering the duration of these protests and how widespread they are. It is even spreading into demonstrations in Canada and in Europe. Now lets get that city on a hill built.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

In that poem I find a lot of resolve. Some cast it as being about diversity. It is not. It is about the suffering, the fearful, and the desperate crying out: "Help! Why must I endure this? Why must I hurt?" In answer Lady Liberty quietly calls to come and find relief in a stark contrast to the brute strength of the conquering Colossus. If we cannot offer that relief to even those who have always lived here and refuse to make that the case then serious action is called for. In a religious sense it rhymes in a lesser sense to the quiet sincere call of Zion.

Who has the monopoly on the black vote?  Who is in charge of these urban areas?  What political persuasion do the judges, mayors, city council, and sheriffs typically hold?  
 

The single most powerful tool in a democracy is the vote.  But if the local government knows they have your vote regardless, why would they bother to win it?  White, suburban women are currently the most catered to voters this year.  And it’s because their vote can be “won”.  
 

Blacks are made to feel they can only vote one way.  And so they have.  And so they are ignored.  White “progressives”, are the black community’s worst enemy.

Edited June 1, 2020 by SteveO