Edit: yo, sorry smith, I didn’t mean to write you a book lol
“Conflict of interest” isn’t a thing anymore. All a person has to do is say “I don’t have a conflict of interest”, and then the matter is settled. I mean why would they lie? What would be their motivation? A conflict of interests? But they don’t have a conflict of interests! They just said so!
You see this shit everywhere now. We’re meant to trust the promissory words of people who have every incentive imaginable to feign innocence or ignorance. It’s really a demonic perversion of “trust but verify”. We have been manipulated into demanding outrageously high standards of evidence for proof wrongdoing. Used to be “the appearance of impropriety is impropriety”. We correctly understood that people in compromised positions have every reason to lie. Now? The liars have convinced everyone that trust should be the default - especially when the liars know that “verification” is impossible.
For some segments of the population, nothing short of a notarized written confession will be accepted as proof of malicious intent. For such people, a guilty verdict is contingent upon evidence that frankly cannot exist; even the most retarded criminal is usually smart enough (or illiterate enough) not to write down their motivations. So no one ever really does anything with ill intent - provided they are a member of your preferred demographic groups, of course.
And that’s the rub, isn’t it? These impossibly high standards for evidence are always selectively deployed based on the politics and cultures involved. Every black-on-white murder magically isn’t racially motivated because there always exists some deniability, no matter how comically implausible. It’s to the point where even a confession of racial hatred is somehow not sufficient to prove racial motivation, which just goes to show that it’s nothing to do with evidence.
On the flip side, white-on-black violence is always reliably framed as racially motivated when there is usually no evidence backing it up, and this still happens even in cases where the violence is clearly motivated by non-racial factors e.g. he was literally shooting at the cops.
One of my biggest problems with Floyd and for which I was insulted over repeatedly was that their was zero evidence of a racial motivation. Even if you believe Chauvin was responsible they didn't demonstrate a racial motivation but it was called a racial killing
Exactly and the media was chomping at the bit to talk about race. I angered some black ppl by saying it’s embarrassing that we make such a fuss for criminals.
Edit: yo, sorry smith, I didn’t mean to write you a book lol
“Conflict of interest” isn’t a thing anymore. All a person has to do is say “I don’t have a conflict of interest”, and then the matter is settled. I mean why would they lie? What would be their motivation? A conflict of interests? But they don’t have a conflict of interests! They just said so!
You see this shit everywhere now. We’re meant to trust the promissory words of people who have every incentive imaginable to feign innocence or ignorance. It’s really a demonic perversion of “trust but verify”. We have been manipulated into demanding outrageously high standards of evidence for proof wrongdoing. Used to be “the appearance of impropriety is impropriety”. We correctly understood that people in compromised positions have every reason to lie. Now? The liars have convinced everyone that trust should be the default - especially when the liars know that “verification” is impossible.
For some segments of the population, nothing short of a notarized written confession will be accepted as proof of malicious intent. For such people, a guilty verdict is contingent upon evidence that frankly cannot exist; even the most retarded criminal is usually smart enough (or illiterate enough) not to write down their motivations. So no one ever really does anything with ill intent - provided they are a member of your preferred demographic groups, of course.
And that’s the rub, isn’t it? These impossibly high standards for evidence are always selectively deployed based on the politics and cultures involved. Every black-on-white murder magically isn’t racially motivated because there always exists some deniability, no matter how comically implausible. It’s to the point where even a confession of racial hatred is somehow not sufficient to prove racial motivation, which just goes to show that it’s nothing to do with evidence.
On the flip side, white-on-black violence is always reliably framed as racially motivated when there is usually no evidence backing it up, and this still happens even in cases where the violence is clearly motivated by non-racial factors e.g. he was literally shooting at the cops.
That’s true. They jumped to a racial narrative with Floyd despite zero evidence.
One of my biggest problems with Floyd and for which I was insulted over repeatedly was that their was zero evidence of a racial motivation. Even if you believe Chauvin was responsible they didn't demonstrate a racial motivation but it was called a racial killing
Exactly and the media was chomping at the bit to talk about race. I angered some black ppl by saying it’s embarrassing that we make such a fuss for criminals.