12-20-2016, 03:11 PM
(12-19-2016, 09:10 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: When one side uses violence and the other doesn't, as is largely the case here, you either have to overlook the violence, you have to lie about who is using it, or you have to drop the false equivalency and point out which side is doing it.
So if you're not advocating overlooking it, and you're discouraging pointing out who is doing it, sounds like you want people to lie about who is using it? I don't think that's a healthy approach.
This is supposedly a 4T, a social moment, that in the past had a lot of violence. I see little violence now. How many have been killed by social unrest this year? One or two mass murderers in a spree shooting does not constitute social unrest--that is simply crime (and is represented in murder statistics which are way down from 3T levels). The word social implies the involvement of a group. Something like a riot, a strike or demonstration, lynching, etc.
What violence are you talking about? How many dead? If there no dead from the violence it doesn't even count since any historical comparison will be to lethal violence. I see almost NO deaths from social unrest this year. compared to a great may in previous years. So what are you talking about?