Crime And Corpses

avatar

We can all agree, I think, that what's happening in the United States of America right now is unfortunate, unwanted and unproductive. But I also think it's taking the easy way out and unproductive to simply say that the riots and looting are bad and that the ones participating in those violent acts are bad people.


protests_small.jpg

source: Wikimedia Commons

That's why I think the below linked video is one to watch. It introduces us to Émile Durkheim, a French sociologist who died in 1917, and who - together with Karl Marx and Max Weber - is commonly cited as one of the principal architects of modern social science. Durkheim was of the opinion that crime has a function in society, and that function is that crime exposes needs that are not met in that society. The example given in the video is somewhat morbid and centers around medical science's need for fresh corpses. It was forbidden back then, as it is now, to dig up freshly buried corpses, but grave-robbery was a crime often committed to fulfill that specific need. Grave robbery exposed this need, and instead of just condemning the perpetrators Durkheim suggested it might be more productive to also address that need. The crimes that are committed right now expose a need as well, and that is to put a stop to the economic injustice that lay at the root of so many social struggles, racial struggles, as well as the overarching class struggle. Like Vaush says in the video: happy people don't riot.

Looting and rioting is bad, especially when it's done from an opportunistic perspective and has nothing to do with the actual political fight that indeed needs to be fought. But we can't leave it at that. It doesn't suffice to, as Biden proposed in his address to the nation, to make the police shoot criminals in the legs instead of the heart, or to "outlaw choke-holds", or to say we need to stop the militarization of the police-force without addressing the deeper systemic causes of that militarization. What makes the unconditional condemnation of the rioters and looters even more egregious, is that anyone with two or more brain-cells saw this coming from a mile away; this social unrest and everything that comes with it, was to be expected. And now Trump has threatened to call in the military itself to "aide" local authorities that are unable to put an end to the upheaval. To be continued, I guess...


Should we Condemn the Rioters?


Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, keep safe, keep healthy!


wave-13 divider odrau steem

Recent articles you might be interested in:

Latest article >>>>>>>>>>>Trickle-Down Looting
Conscious Capitalism?Hyper-Responsibility
Culture Of FearCorporate Propaganda
Speechless...Living Next Door To Elon

wave-13 divider odrau steem

Thanks for stopping by and reading. If you really liked this content, if you disagree (or if you do agree), please leave a comment. Of course, upvotes, follows, resteems are all greatly appreciated, but nothing brings me and you more growth than sharing our ideas.



0
0
0.000
11 comments
avatar

Why are you not talking about Antifa and the people that funds them?

0
0
0.000
avatar

....that doesn't fit his communist strategy.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Because antifa isn't a thing, it has no funders, no organization, no leadership, no membership-cards, nothing. Antifa will be the label under which unwanted leftist voices will be stifled. It's a label used by fascists to paint anti-fascists as fascists.

0
0
0.000
avatar

is commonly cited as one of the principal architects of modern social science.

Just goes to show what a bunch of idiots social scientists are, if they decide to listen to one word from the second cousin of the banking family, the Rothschilds.

(And idiots still people think that communism is for the people). lmao.

0
0
0.000
avatar

what a bunch of idiots social scientists are...

Yes, anti-intellectualism is another defining trait of the alt-right. And you can't be a cousin of a family my friend; if you want to go the conspiratorial route, at least try to do it right.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

You arguing intellectualism? lol

You trying to frame me as anything 'right', shows the weakness of your position. Or the delusion of your reality, which, to be fair, does seems to seeping out in a lot of your posts...
(which is a shame, because you point out many valid realities, also)

Oh, apologies - Marx was 3rd cousin, not 2nd. (it's years ago since I went over all this stuff)
Conspiracy route?
No, I was pointing out facts, (and the gullibility and naivety of the left).

You think blood/marriage/family, isn't thicker than almost any other social bond? Seriously?lol.
You think the family and money had no influence? lol.
Soooo naive.
(the left position and is entirely based on peoples naivety, low iq, and hubris - the perfect storm the power hungry- higher IQ manipulators- to capitalize on..)

llll.jpg

re taxation and law - other comment...

You attempted a conflation between philosophical principles and pragmatism - and you actually thought you scored. smh.

lmfao

.....if you cant see the very clumsy argument and glaring hole in your logic - and then telling me what it is - then you're waaaaaaaaay below my pay grade... its a bit like Einstein telling a newborn about the theory of relativity, and then Albert getting really pissed off because the baby doesn't enter into a grown up discussion about the speed of light...

Are you grown up enough to admit your error? Are you even aware of what it is?
I doubt it, but I'm an optimist...
...or does that go against the alinsky school of 'not apologizing - even if your wrong?'
(p.s - it doesn't show strength, it shows your own intellectual/emotional weakness)

You need to learn more about critical thinking.

I'm here to help, but I don't talk to little people in nappies about the speed of light.

Sort it out.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Wow... using bold fonts are we? You do realize that this doesn't strengthen your "arguments"? No, I stated a fact; anti-intellectualism is a defining trait of the alt-right (and one you're exhibiting in many of your responses). You on the other hand didn't state facts. Since you're talking about "philosophical principles", I assume you're aware of the difference between descriptive and normative claims; now go back, read your responses and tell me again if you're "stating facts". Marx being a third cousin of the Rothschilds (not second) is stating a fact, saying that therefore no one should take him seriously is giving an opinion, an opinion used in so many stupid conspiracy theories I've lost count. Marx shares a great-great-grandparent with one of the Rothschilds and there are so many conspiracy theorists who use this fact to extrapolate wild stories about him being their agent, stories for which you've obviously fallen. Next thing you'll be telling me is that communism was a Jewish conspiracy funded by the big Zionist banks. Or did you already do that..? You know which infamous Austrian fascist also did that, don't you? So if you really believe you're "here to help", maybe try to not act in bad faith, try to stick with the facts and don't push me into the role of an Einstein trying to school an ignorant kid. Now, go out and play with your Illuminati friends...

0
0
0.000
avatar

....and you never even addressed 'the gaping hole'? (don't tell me you don't know what hole I'm talking about....please don't say you are not aware of it?...too funny).

You're like, one of those weally weally clever people, aren't you? lol

Video coming '@zyx066 in the bunker' - or something - haven't worked out the details yet. - You've already provided the meat, two veg, and ice cream...lol....

(I'll put in 3speak, so you can enjoy!)

If you wish to be grown up and address the gaping hole (before I make the video) , I'll be sure to add that in as well - in the name of fairness.

I assume you're aware of the difference between descriptive and normative claims;

I'll see if I address it into the video, just for you....

0
0
0.000
avatar

That's not how it works. If you have a problem with anything I write, you have to be specific. Waving your hand and rambling on about some perceived logical fallacy, without pointing out yourself what that fallacy is, isn't productive at all. So I'll be looking forward to your video; no one is ever too old to learn ;-)

0
0
0.000
avatar

Cheers matey, I'll be on it - sometime.

I'm looking after my doggy right now (smacked by a car yesterday/day before)

0
0
0.000
avatar

Awww... That sucks :-( I really hope you both will be alright again soon. Wish you both all the best!

0
0
0.000