Toledo, Ohio...

[BrianW]

So, who was looting there?

I saw a police SUV running over a white guy. Also saw some black folks trying to beat down a door while another black guy was running out a window with some 'loot' as in 'looting'.

Should I ignore it, and act like it was just an act of survival, or poverty? Or, can we actually call it what is was?

smile.gif

[ 10-17-2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: BrianW ]

[cedar savage]

Nahh, no big deal, just some angry kids 'milling about' .

The Toledo Blade story... (http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051016/NEWS16/51016003)


Mayor Ford took a little different perspective.

“I don’t think it’s going to have a lasting impact,” he said of the day’s events. “No one was killed. I don’t believe anyone was seriously injured. There was a crowd-control issue. There was milling around. After talking with them, and them deciding to desist, we had the place cleared. It was done. There were some arrests made. And that’s the way it should have been handled.”The real stupidity in this was deciding to let the freakin' Nazis march in North Toledo. Somebody's just gotta have a screw loose.

[Katherine]

SInce they never filed for a parade permit and were supposed to stick to the side walks, there wasn't a legal means of preventing the march. The mayor said next time he will seek a court order if at all possible.

[Mark Van]

The problem wasn't in allowing the march, the problem was giving them police protection. I am pretty sure that if there were no police around, the riot wouldn't have taken place, except there may have been 15 dead Nazis. The violence would have only been directed to the Nazis, and not the police.

[Osborne Russel]

Originally posted by Mark Van:
I am pretty sure that if there were no police around, the riot wouldn't have taken place, except there may have been 15 dead Nazis. Non sequitur.

The real Nazis knew that street brawls were their most effective means of recruitment of young stupid males. It worked. Read about it. Meanwhile, this is America.

[garland reese]

Great thing about America.......the freedom of speech and so on....no matter how Nutballed the group.

Not so great thing about America..... any Nutballed group has the freedom of expression ;)

Freedom....sometimes you just wonder if our society is capable of such a responsibility.
Garland

[Domesticated_Mr. Know It All]

Lots of stupid people in Ohio, no doubt. ;)
I can testify to that. :D

[ishmael]

"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
-Noam Chomsky

I woudn't worry too much about American Nazis. We are too diverse and divisive for any such idiocy to gain hold.

The guttersnipe gangs who used a small political rally as an excuse to loot and riot...well I do worry about them. In Toledo no less! Breakdown in civilized rules can lead to a backlash by the powers that be. But trust me, it will be different than Nazis, if it happens.

[Katherine]

Yeah, nothing like that could ever happen here. :rolleyes:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5b/Kkk1928.jpg/250px-Kkk1928.jpg

[ishmael]

At the height of their membership the KKK remained a relatively minor political power. You'll note no rioting as they marched, and that was the height of their power.

I could be wrong, but I just don't see it happening here. We're too damn obstreperous.

But that doesn't mean a 'cleaner', non-racist, form of fascism could take hold. Humans have always been subject to such dark possibilities, and we should always guard against it.

[ 10-17-2005, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: ishmael ]

[Katherine]

At their height, the KKK boasted a membership of 4,000,000. I'd hardly call that small.

[ishmael]

You worry about it, Kat. Membership in such groups has been on the decline for decades, unless you count the Nation of Islam. And I'm not sure they've been growing much.

I worry much more about 'stealth' fascism...fascism which doesn't target a group, but steals liberty quietly from all of us.

[Katherine]

Just pointing out the historical inaccuracy of your statements.

[ishmael]

Four million, eh? What's the reference? Does that mean they wielded much political power, except in small enclaves? How many 'members' were active?

Quoting a seemingly big number doesn't equate to signifigant power.

Don't get me wrong, the nuts need to be labeled, and in parts of the country the Klan was a pernicious cancer. But I maintain that at the height of their membership they weren't a very signifigant political power. Certainly not nationally. Definately not like National Socialism in Germany circa 1931.

[Katherine]

Jack, they controlled several state governments and had members that were Senators and Congressmen. They had a great deal of power. Thank God it's sunk to an enclave of nutcases, but once upon a time they were one of the leading political forces in the North America. All this info is easy to find on the web, just type KKK into google and stand back.

[Ross M]

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan) :

"At its peak, Klan membership exceeded 4 million and comprised 20% of the adult white male population in many broad geographic regions, as high as 40% in some areas"

"the KKK controlled the governments of Tennessee, Indiana, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to some of the Southern legislatures. Klan influence was particularly strong in Indiana, where Republican Klansman Edward Jackson was elected governor in 1924, and the entire apparatus of state government was riddled with Klansmen."

It may or may not be important but the above refers to the second iteration of the KKK, circa 1920.

Ross

[Osborne Russel]

Originally posted by ishmael:
You worry about it, Kat. Membership in such groups has been on the decline for decades, unless you count the Nation of Islam. And I'm not sure they've been growing much.Didn't National Socialism go from zero to Der Fuehrer in less than twenty years?

The fuel is there, and the oxygen. All that's needed is heat.