2016 Republican Convention

(UPDATE: Now With Video) Flag Burning Outside RNC Turns into Chaotic Melee Between Police and Protesters

Several self-described communist activists arrested.

|

Flag burning at the RNC
Reason/Anthony L. Fisher

Reason was on the scene for what was arguably the hottest moment yet between police and protesters during the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Cleveland: a flag burning by a small group of communist activists, which quickly turned violent as police attempted to make arrests. 

The flag burning had been advertised by a local bookstore as scheduled to take place near the entrance to the RNC secure zone at 4p. Around 3:30p, a man carrying a flag was quickly surrounded by police and firefighters, which caused a scrum of media and looky-loos to follow, but no burning took place and the man left the scene without incident. 

Then, a group of very loud homophobic and racist Christians with megaphones arrived on the scene and were quickly surrounded by police from the crowds they were antagonizing. After about 20 minutes, this group started to march away from the arena, and much of the crowd and assembled police followed them down the street. 

This is when a group wearing black t-shirts reading "Revolution-Nothing Less!" locked arms and formed a circle. After a brief statement where a man with a megaphone said they were protesting "open fascist" Donald Trump and "proven war criminal" Hillary Clinton. He added, "America has always been first at genocide, at slavery, at exploitation, at destruction of the environment." Then, he lit an American flag on fire.

One police officer standing behind me called for backup while another officer advanced on the group with a fire extinguisher. At that point, dozens more officers broke up the circle and formed a perimeter as two of the flag burners were arrested.

As supporters of the flag burners chanted "America was never great," the police attempted to widen the circle by shouting "move back" and physically pushing people. Some protesters pushed back and were detained, which led to the police pushing back on the assembled crowd even harder into an area near the RNC entrance controlled by the Secret Service. 

A Secret Service officer standing behind me shouted at the police, "Guys! The other way!," but the officers continued pushing people into a steel fence near the entrance. About a minute later, the police ordered everyone to cross the street and leave the scene or be arrested. 

At least five of the protesters were led away in handcuffs, and USA Today reports that the flag-burners are associated with the group Revcom, which describes itself as "The voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA."

Flag desecration was ruled by the Supreme court to be a form of constitutionally protected speech in 1989. But the two current major party presidential nominees appear to disagree with that precedent. In 2005 Hillary Clinton co-sponsored a law which would have criminalized flag burning and in 2015 Donald Trump told the Daily Caller, "Personally, I don't think it should be legal," adding, "People burning the flag, I don't like them in this country."

UPDATE: You can watch raw video I shot of the flag burning and the police response below:

NEXT: Matt Kibbe, Students For Liberty, and Free The People's "The Day The GOP Died"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Please tell me Yakety Sax was playing in the background during what sounds like a pretty farcical scene.

    1. Don’t talkback!

      1. Wrong song, champ.

  2. …in 2015 Donald Trump told the Daily Caller […] “People burning the flag, I don’t like them in this country.”

    He says that like it hasn’t occurred to him the feeling is mutual.

  3. Life returns to the hollowed shell of thousands in the barn.

  4. They can do us all a favor and burn down the football stadium. I don’t think I can take another season of the ‘Clowns’.

    1. … or send in the smith hounds.

    2. At least they don’t have Manziel any longer.

    3. But how will they let you down one last time?

  5. I’d take a goddamn flag burning to the trump cemetery flashing with disco dreams.

  6. Why were they arrested? They didn’t commit a crime as far as I can tell. Oh yeah. FYTW. “Rule of law” is a joke.

    1. For lighting a fire in a crowded security theater.

    2. Anyone can be arrested at any time. Then the prosecutor just will drop the putative charges later, when there’s less chance of rioting (or embarrassment of the local power structure).

      1. That’s what I mean. Fail to obey the whim of some government goon with a gun, and he’s going to arrest you (or worse). And nothing else happens. That is not rule of law. Rule of law means you actually have to be breaking the law for the arrest to be legitimate, and if not the officer would face charges.

        1. and if not the officer would face charges.

          The fact that officers dont’ face charges for this or any number of transgressions, is the heart of the issue with police. If producers of any good would be granted a monopoly and made to be immune to almost all prosecution for their actions in the course of performing their job, I dare say that product would diminish in quality, rise in price and probably kill some people.

        2. Or, y’know, it could be because they lit a fucking fire in a crowded area and then got violent, as Commies tend to do whenever they appear in public.

          Whichever.

          1. As long as they didn’t yell fire I think it’s okay.

    3. You probably aren’t allowed to light things on fire on the sidewalk. Which would explain why the fire department was there.

      Personally, I prefer to let this happen.

      1. I can’t wait until someone lights a flag on fire during the DNCs fart-in.

      2. That’s kind of what I was thinking. In the city there is probably a law against starting fires on the street, whatever the fuel. But occasionally other speech-like stuff that would usually be illegal gets a pass when it’s political speech, so buttons.

    4. Why were they arrested?

      Looks like for shoving back at the riot cops.

      But, really, for the only reason anyone is ever arrested: Failure to Obey.

  7. So, dumbfuck armed brain-dicked screaming stooge kid hired by the fraternal Columbus/Cleveland/all other shitty American city police guild gets excited when tricky the flame licks from his daddy’s war symbol and gets emo on the usually shitty just as dumb youngster burning the flag and not a single one of these living creatures understand a single thing about the reality unfolding around them…

  8. Freedom is no longer understand in the land of the…

    free?

    1. Well look at this sketchy punk… can’t even fucking post in proper times.

      WHAT THE FUCK is ‘understand’? really

      underSTOOD, please

      1. Easy Agile, easy…

        *presses panic button

  9. Smokers fume as France mulls ban on ‘too cool’ Gitanes and Gauloises

    The ban, which could also cover the Lucky Strike, Marlboro Gold, Vogue and Fortuna brands, is the logical conclusion of a new public health law ? based on a European directive ? which stipulates tobacco products “must not include any element that contributes to the promotion of tobacco or give an erroneous impression of certain characteristics”.

    Reporting the ban, Le Figaro said that while the directive was “relatively vague”, it clearly covered anything suggesting “masculinity or femininity, physical slimness, youth or sociability”.

    […]

    According to the ministry, the packaging of Gauloises and Gitanes ? the latter features the figure of a woman dancing with a fan ? represent “feminine icons”, while Vogue and News brands are “youth and social symbols”, and Lucky Strike, Fortuna and Marlboro Gold (previously Marlboro Light) suggest “luck and success”.

    So, they say you have to change from Light to Gold, because Light is misleading, and then before you know it…

    1. How’s France’s social liberalism going?

      1. I don’t see any here.

        1. That’s because “social liberalism” as spoken of on Reason is a reactionary appeal to a non-existent past. How ironic.

          See the original social liberals were socialists and in American context it generally started as 1960s liberals who were far from “get the government out of social issues” as they supported gun control for example

          Problem is Reason likes to ignore social reformers and conflate them with the Moral Majority. See what we think of as Socons are Southern Baptists and Catholics who were (and still are in the case of the latter) Democrats while the Republicans have a history of Northern Protestant Social Reformers who disliked the other two groups and now are mostly Democrats and are a key precursor to modern Progressives. For example Prohibition was heavily supported by the Northern Protestant Social Reformers but opposed by the Catholics.

          Same thing in Europe where the anti-clericalists and anti-Catholics like Bismarck liked to attack backwards Catholics but were far from “leaving people alone”. And many anti-Muslims today have similar attitudes…

  10. “America has always been first at genocide, at slavery, at exploitation, at destruction of the environment.”

    Nope. Not even close.

    1. I had to chuckle a little at the blatant stupidity of that. Especially coming from communists.

      1. Especially coming from communists.

        I didn’t even think of that angle. The left’s ability to pack that much stupid into such small sentences is astonishing.

        1. From the CPUSA website…
          Q Why does the CPUSA support Democratic Party candidates for the presidency instead of running their own candidates?
          A The Communist Party does not endorse candidates from other parties, but we are deeply involved in mobilizing people to participate in the elections. The presidential election is not just about candidates themselves. It is about choosing what direction the country will go in. bla bla bla bla
          You get the picture. The Go Pee represents the Klan, WCTU adn Prohibition party, the Dems represent East German communism (or North Korean… whutever’s handy)

    2. America ain’t perfect, lovely. Let’s not pretend this is so. Because our jails are filled with millions of doubts. Our exploitation of the poor? We throw those in jail. Destruction? We throw those in jail.

      In fact, America destroys little towns by throwing many pill-popping parents in jail leaving towns filled with grandparents raising kids. Happens all over small town ‘Murica.

      Love ya, babe. Playa for Prez, but… I go with your ‘nope’. I reject your not even ‘close’ for the last couple points.

      Genocide and slavery IS owned by the world without the Murican borders and this I concur with the PlayMan with severe brotensity!

      1. Well said. I think.

      2. I reject your not even ‘close’ for the last couple points.

        I reject your rejection. If you really think America for all of it’s faults, comes within an imperial mile of the truly worst socio-political entities in history then you desperately need to get some perspective and read something outside of the Marxist school of history.

        1. Grab your dumb demons and rip their heads off in an altar of your choosing because they are infecting
          your intelligence because you are proper and Christian and don’t live in the slippery delicious zones, right?

          Judging your country makes you the freest fucking hymen on earth.

          1. I’m not a Christian and I’m an anarcho-capitalist. I judge the state harshly. But I recognize degrees of awful and the US doesn’t win top prize in any of those categories.

            1. You do realize you’re interacting with rambling poetry/performance art as if it’s a simple argument about facts?

              1. Sometimes I can’t help myself.

        2. Grab your dumb demons and rip their heads off in an altar of your choosing because they are infecting
          your intelligence because you are proper and Christian and don’t live in the slippery delicious zones, right?

          Judging your country makes you the freest fucking hymen on earth.

        3. Grab your dumb demons and rip their heads off in an altar of your choosing because they are infecting
          your intelligence because you are proper and Christian and don’t live in the slippery delicious zones, right?

          Judging your country makes you the freest fucking hymen on earth.

        4. I dunno. Extermination of the natives. Slavery. More people in prison per capita than anyone else except perhaps China.

          Something about the tallest midget…

          1. Extermination of the natives.

            A whole lot of bad history on that topic. Seldom mentioned is the fact that old world disease depopulated North America much more drastically than Europeans and atrocities were largely mutual between Europeans and natives, as well as natives with other natives.

            Did the American out-genocide the Mongols?

            Slavery.

            No corner of the globe didn’t have slavery and vast parts of it abolished slavery relatively long after the United States did, so definitely not the tallest midget on that count. And you really think the Americans out-slaved the Arab slave trade? Don’t let the conspicuous lack of a surviving population of descendants of the slaves taken to Arab countries from Africa fool you, that fact should inform you.

            More people in prison per capita than anyone else except perhaps China.

            No, I think we have China beat on the per capita basis. There’s plenty to blast America about and much shame to go around, but on those explicitly mentioned categories; genocide, slavery, “exploitation”, and destruction of the environment… I’m not so sure it’s accurate to claim the United States is the top dog on any of those categories. Yes it’s a tall midget contest, but if the group making the argument is using it to further their goal of enslaving all of society to the gods of purported equality, it’s probably worth a damn rebuttal.

    3. How many nuclear weapons does this peaceful, beneficient country called America have? How much does it waste on weapons of destruction, who is the leading arms merchant, how much of its land has it permanently polluted in order to develop its stockpiles of WMDs. Axis of Evil? Look in the fucking mirror, Uncle Sam.

      1. Yeah. Communists have a great track record of not producing nukes, not exploiting people and not extracting the maximum value from the environment.

        While most would draw a line between communism and slavery, it’s a mighty thin line. The only reason that communists haven’t widely adopted slavery is that it has not been en vogue since communism has been.

        1. But commies have good intentions. That’s all that matters. I mean, like equality and stuff.

          1. As long as it didn’t say “Jewish” on your fifth line.

        2. That’s the other thing. The minute someone says that national health care or Social Security might be good ideas out come the Mao and Stalin references. Because, really, once you go down the road that it might be a good idea to have some sort of social safety net or some regulation on business the only logical thing to conclude is that the next step in said process involves gulags and self-criticism sessions.

          But let’s get back to the question at hand that drives these flag burners to cloth immolation by asking a simple question. In the last 50 years, which nation’s army killed the most people? Psst, it doesn’t involve a Josef Stalin reference.

          1. Pinksock,

            What does this:

            “America has always been first at genocide, at slavery, at exploitation, at destruction of the environment.”

            have to do with national health care or SS?

          2. You don’t read the articles, do you?

            1. People read the articles here?

          3. “In the last 50 years, which nation’s army killed the most people?”
            How about Cambodia’s, you lying POS?

          4. In the last 50 years, which nation’s army killed the most people? Psst, it doesn’t involve a Josef Stalin reference.

            Pfft… when you have to limit it to a time period where the Soviet Union didn’t exist for half of it, you may not be on the highest ground. How about we talk about a per annum count of the US from 1776-2016 versus a per annum count of the USSR from 1917-1991. That comparison may be a bit more enlightening.

          5. In the last 50 years

            Sure, why not start there? Especially since that includes (rightly or wrongly) non-nation armies (taliban, IS,etc). it also includes enemies that aren’t around in exactly the same context today as when they were fought-if at all.

          6. Because as soon as you go down the road of thinking its ok to appropriate the labor of others then the *inevitable* destination is gulags and self-criticism sessions. Because people don’t like having their shit taken and so try to avoid it and so you have to increase the ruthlessness of your appropriation measures to keep those ‘wreckers’ in line.

            That’s on top of how, inevitably, the definition of what is ‘important enough’ for forced appropriation inevitably increases in scope over time.

          7. In the last 50 years, which nation’s army killed the most people? Psst, it doesn’t involve a Josef Stalin reference.

            How about this question – for the duration of its current existence, which country has killed the greatest number of its own citizens?

            Psst, it does involve a Josef Stalin reference.

            1. Psst, it does involve a Josef Stalin reference.

              Hey, Mao worked very hard to get top billing in the Communist Mass Death Olympics, thank you very much.

          8. The logical conclusion of any government “safety net” or other program that employs coercion to transfer wealth is slavery. But I guess it’s OK because the people are slaves to the government, which is the people, so they’re slaves to themselves or something, which means it isn’t really slavery. Right?

      2. How many nuclear weapons did that peaceful, beneficient country called Russia have? How about that peaceful, beneficient country called the People’s Republic of China? How about those peaceful, beneficient countries called Pakistan, India, and North Korea?

        Let’s see, as of 2014

        US 7,000 Russia 8,000
        France 300 China 250
        UK 250 North Korea 6
        Israel 80
        7,360 8,256

        Who is the leading arms merchant? Russia, by a long mile. Our shit is *expensive* and we only sell to a limited selection of ‘allies’. Russian stuff is cheap and they’ll sell to anyone.

        How much of its land has it permanently polluted to develop its stockpiles of WMD? A fuck sight less than the USSR and the CIS have done.

        http://tinyurl.com/qgh72zx

        You don’t see shit like that *anywhere* in the West.

        You know, you come on here and make these statements, statements that 5 minutes of Googling would show you are incorrect and asinine, but you won’t even bother to check your basic facts.

    4. Yeah, really third or fourth at best. And that was a while ago.

      1. For genocide, if we’re talking just straight numbers of fatalities here, America’s actually pretty damn low on the scale, mostly due to the groups they targeted already having low populations. Unless you’re one of those people who count accidental transmission of Eurasian diseases hundreds of years before America was even colonized as an American genocide.

        1. Has America ever actually perpetrated a true genocide?

          The NA’s and Europeans/early US citizens had some run-ins, as did the military. But was there ever really a stated US policy objective to eradicate a race?

          1. The Trail of Tears and the American treatment of the Philippines were pretty bad and probably the closest the US has come to a genocide.

            1. Those certainly fit the criteria.

          2. That depends if you consider the Europeans morally responsible for the old world diseases that unpeopled vast swathes of the Americas early on.

            1. I honestly can’t hold people that ignorant of what is disease and how it spreads responsible for what happened when they popped in to a completely new population.

          3. Depends on what you define as a ‘race’. Some would argue that statements by military and government officials in regards to the Sioux following Wounded Knee could be considered genocidal. Americans did build what could be considered concentration camps in the Philippines where there was a great deal of torture and execution. The numbers of deaths are pretty heavily questioned.

            But a lot of America’s dark moments are simply on a much smaller scale. For example, the Trail of Tears, a particularly nasty bit of America’s history, resulted in approximately five thousand deaths. That’s less than one week of the Armenian genocide, one day of the Holodomor, and one hour of the Holocaust when the death camps were rolling at full power. And that’s with the low estimates of those events.

          4. Yes. Several times.

            Trail of tears.

            Smallpox blankets.

            Are a couple.

            I don’t believe they were necessarily set up to exterminate (vice simply ‘drive away and if they all died, well shit happens’) and they were relatively small scale actions taken by factions within the government (vice being an official USG policy) that were not encouraged, but not countered either.

            These were things that would be considered genocide if they were done by another nation. But we simply don’t have the record of a Nazi Germany, USSR, PRC, Cambodia, North Korea, etc. I’m pretty sure the sum total of people under the jurisdiction of the USG (including Native Americans) killed by USG actions over the complete existence of our state is less than what the USSR or China (let alone Cambodia or North Korea) managed in a couple of decades.

            1. Smallpox blankets.

              Wasn’t that during the Colonial Period though?

              1. Uh, yes – as were the Trail of Tears and anything else involving Native American genocide.

                Once we had achieved our ‘Manifest Destiny’ there was really no reason to keep fucking with them as they had all either integrated or been relegated to reservations.

                Though Canada and Australia kept trying to eradicate aboriginal cultures for long after.

                http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06……html?_r=0

                1. No, Trail of Tears was in 1830 by an actual American administration.

                  Lord Amherst’s smallpox blankets was a policy he set in place in the 1760s as Commander of North America in Pontiac’s War.

                  1. And there’s pretty good reason to believe that the smallpox blankets didn’t really contribute much in the way of extra deaths. The populations that received them had already been trading with smallpox-infected white traders; they were fucked regardless.

                2. Well I meant the most infamous incident of smallpox blankets was by the British Army during America’s colonial past so it was in fact an act of British Imperialism rather than by the USG.

                  Ah residential schools. One thing I notice is how the do-gooding sentiment behind it: “We have to civilize the savages for their own good by destroying their inferior culture” is often glossed over. Gee I wonder

              2. Much of the smallpox blanket narrative goes back to our good friend Ward Churchill, he of 9/11 fame. To the best of my knowledge there is one single documented account of any intention of giving smallpox blankets to natives, and that occurred during a siege in wartime prior to the revolution. Whether it actually occurred or not is anyone’s guess.

                The Trail of Tears was ethnic cleansing, not genocide. If Jackson had wanted to murder every Cherokee, he could have.

                For history buffs, has there ever been a case where Anglos here or abroad have ever engaged in genocide?

                1. It seems there is evidence that smallpox blankets were actually given during the Siege of Fort Pitt but it seems this was done before Amherst thought of it and no one knows for certain if it even worked. There doesn’t seem to be much evidence that the British tried it again in North America (they may have used it again in Australia in 1789) or if the US tried it…

                2. Ward Churchill’s work was in regards to the U.S. Army doing it in the 1830s I believe, and was discredited. The Siege of Fort Pitt was Lord Amherst’s plan, and it’s fairly well documented through both letters and journals.

                  Again, depends on what you call ‘genocide’. Americans don’t like to hear this, but the English put their kid gloves on when fighting against American independence. Compare their actions against other independence movements in say, Ceylon and India and there’s simply no contest. In the Indian Rebellion of 1857, massacres by British troops were common, along with the classic looting and pillaging. Infamously, British troops captured most of Bahadur Shah’s (the Mughal Emperor) male descendants and executed them.

                  The Irish Potato Famine is said to have been prolonged and encouraged by the English, but that’s an argument I’m not familiar with.

                  Then there’s the modern stuff, like how in the Boer War they took Boer families, scorched earth’d their farms and put them in camps where starvation and disease were rampant. The English to this day defend it as accidental and a problem with logistics. Then you’ve got other stuff that was deliberately poorly documented, like the Mau Mau Uprising in 1950s Kenya, where we know there was deliberate massacres, concentration camps and lots of torture.

                  1. The Fort Pitt account was what I was thinking of.

                    Not to make light of historical abuses much less torture or mass murder, but I was going for a literal definition of genocide along the lines of “cleansing via murder of an entire population” rather than cleansing via eviction or episodic slaughters like Wounded Knee. Cromwell was the first name that came to mind, but I don’t believe he was ever inclined to pursue a policy of murdering the Irish when he stole their land.

                    1. Well that’s the problem of the vagueness of ‘genocide’. Contrary to popular belief, outside of fairly small communities and groups being wiped away, people historically tend to not specifically aim for the complete eradication of ethnic or cultural groups, usually because it’s simply just easier to crush your opposition and assume power (I mean, it’s just pragmatic, you need someone to work for you afterwards, and not everyone is a libertarian with a vast orphan workforce). The Crusaders, for example, loved a massacre or two, but never attempted to completely wipe out Muslims from their Holy Land territories.

                      Aiming to completely eliminate a group is actually a historical outlier, and even in the case of the Holocaust it’s often influenced by other factors. If you check out the documentation of Wannsee Conference, you see that one of their major justifications for the death camps as opposed to sterilization was that they simply didn’t have enough food to feed the entirely of the Third Reich, so of course the Jews and other groups are targeted.

  11. Then, a group of very loud homophobic and racist Christians

    Obligatory.

    1. Good, solid reporting there.

  12. How many wars were fought under the pretense that these goddamn Commies could burn the American flag – the symbol of the greatest nation the world has ever known – and not be arrested for it?

    In 2005 Hillary Clinton co-sponsored a law which would have criminalized flag burning and in 2015 Donald Trump told the Daily Caller, “Personally, I don’t think it should be legal,” adding, “People burning the flag, I don’t like them in this country.”

    Oh.

    Well, at least I know the government won’t be worrying about my anti-government internet comments.

    1. Vile Juggler spills many thought sins from his finger ejaculates within reach of fusion centers. Peace out, ruinous majesty.

  13. Question: which group who doesn’t want the government telling them what to do? It’s the Christians, correct?

    1. I’m pretty sure the greatest proponents are sovereign citizens and anarchists. Followed closely thereafter by libertarians.

      Not sure what Christianity has to do with it, but I’m guessing you’re about to inform me.

    2. A: Most people. Then again, “most people” like it when the government tells others what to do, so long as they aren’t included in it.

      Still, you are as pig-ignorant as ever, AmSock.

        1. :tips hat to the kind gentlemanperson:

      1. Totally unconstitutional to be convicted of burning the flag.

        Totally constitutional to be convicted of burning a piece of cloth on a public sidewalk, even if prosecutors regularly use their discretion to only convict the flag-burners.

    3. Question: you’re just here to learn, right?

      1. I think here inside with free speech– not rushlimbaugh.com like you, mate.

        1. Fuck me… I *side* with better free market spell checkers. How much money has been devoted to developing this IPhone modern wonder?

          1. I’m sure that if the President were to create a Department of Spellcheckers then we’d have the innovation needed to ensure these sorts of things never happened again.

          2. Zillions…but they also figured the operator of the phone was smarter than said phone. (pssst, this is where you come in).

        2. Oooohhh! ZING,Playa…he’s got you there!

        3. Radio Yerevan was asked: Is it true that there is freedom of speech in the Soviet Union the same as there is the USA?
          Radio Yerevan answered: In principle, yes. In the USA, you can stand in front of the Washington Monument in Washington, DC, and burn the American flag, and you will not be punished. In the Soviet Union, you can stand in Red Square in Moscow and burn the American flag, and you will not be punished.

    4. I know plenty of Christians who want the government telling them what to do.

      1. All I see for all of those links, is blank gray screens. Maybe Ghostery is blocking the content.

        1. I’m using Ghostery and I see them.

        2. I can say for sure that its you, not me. works fine even w/ adblock, noscript etc.

          *for a change!

    1. Was everybody kung fu fighting?

      1. His stance kinda looked like he was getting Kung Fu ball-kicked…

        /maybe he was attempting a horse stance?

  14. Fucking tired of people not burning the fucking hell out of government. Tired of lazy asshole motherfuckers that think all statehouses are gerbil farms that breed tiny cage ticklers that don’t come wired to dominate with boot to neck.

  15. The Children Are the Future

    Tho, seriously = what are the odds the dipshit with the “Free Syria” shirt has any clue what’s happened in Syria over the past 5 years?

    1. Free Syria from what, exactly? Its own people?

      1. Russians? Tibet?

        1. I can imagine a conversation with that dude:
          “Free Syria!”
          “Yeah let’s free Syrians from those ruthless Tibetans!”
          “Yeah bro!”
          “We also need to free Tibet from those crazy Syrians!”
          “HELL YES BRO”

      2. Its a good question

        Does he mean,

        “Free Syria (from western interference! And let Assad’s wholesale massacre of dissidents proceed apace!)

        or

        “Free Syria (from Assad! And let ISIS and Al Nusra impose Sharia law!)

        or

        “Free Syria (let the US help the ragtag Free Syrian Army win! who will promptly go to war with Hezbollah and Iran)

        Its like = dude, could you be less specific?

          1. *pours Mai Thai

      3. It being full of non-Sunni Syrians?

    2. free syria goes back to the goddamn late 80’s, brother. Old school genocides are hard to track especially when mixed with motherfucking billowing islam pollution. Good luck finding references… However, what pisses me off about the anti-Syria crown I HATE ALL MUSLIMS crowd is that many fine and amazing syrians have created businesses in Murica over the last couple of decades RUNNING FROM TYRANNY TO AMERICA from ASSAD HELL>

      I understand and promote the rejection of ALL religions. I also appreciate greatly the idea that ALL religions should operate within the boundaries of a free society with peace and fluidity. I will not, however, condone the appropriation of adult freedom by sharia or Jesus or the motherfucking Chinese.

      1. I recall “free Lebanon FROM Syria”

        But i’ve never heard anyone since 1971 saying that the Assads should go because there was something so yummy and awesome waiting to take their place.

        1. Assad should remain, constitution?

          1. I’m not making any argument whether he should stay/go/or dance

            i’m just saying, for most of my life, the issue w/ syria was not that people felt that it was an “oppressed citizenry laboring underneath an unwanted leader”

            the issue w/ syria tended to be more related to “make it stop fucking w/ lebanon & Israel”

            As far as i can recall, there’s never been a “Free Syria” movement akin to, say, “Free Palestine”. Or “free Iraq” (e.g. dissidents agitating for the removal of Saddam).

            Assad was never widely loved by anyone; he was always seen as a thug and a scumbag; but – and i’m not super hip to their local history – i don’t recall there ever being a perception that if the alawite regime were removed, that something wonderfully better would take its place.

            i could be mistaken; my observation was simply that the kid in the above photo was probably not dealing with the topic on any level deeper than “it sounds cool”.

        2. There are only a few ways to have a peaceful, stable society. The first is to have a very homogeneous society like Japan. When people are alike, they tend to get along better. The second way is to have a heterogeneous society where one group has all the weapons or money or has a much larger share of the population, like Yugoslavia. Such countries are very vulnerable to civil war. And the only other way is to have a common set of values such as tolerance for dissent, respect for the rule of law, and the right to keep and bear arms.

          Only a few countries fit into the last category.

          1. There are only a few ways to have a peaceful, stable society. The first is to have a very homogeneous society like Japan. When people are alike, they tend to get along better.

            -1 142 years of Sengoku

            1. But +1 Edo Period of 265 years

              1. That’s not how falsifiability works.

                1. I didn’t say that very homogeneous societies are always peaceful, just that they tend to be.

                  I forgot to add that the longest periods of peace in history came from having a top dog empire- British and Roman come to mind.

                2. You keep doing that “falsifiability” thing. as though any time someone says something, a single example entirely contradicts it.

                  Not all claims are absolute claims (even when they superficially appear to be), and its silly to pretend so.

                  I don’t know how true his point is – but i don’t see how the sengoku period necesarily means japan was necessarily MORE prone to war than any other civilization on earth.

                  Saying X type of society “got along better” doesn’t mean “war never ever ever happened”.

                  Western Civilization certainly had near-constant war for most of its history, but constant-war was so taken for granted that we didn’t really come up with a snappy name for it like Sengoku Jidai

                  i’m just saying, i don’t see how your point says anything at all re: his actual claim.

                  if he says, “There are only a few ways to have a peaceful, stable society.”

                  and you say “but one of your examples wasn’t ALWAYS peaceful”… not only does it ignore his broader point; it doesn’t even necessarily undermine that single example, because its entirely dependent on whether the cited case is “more peaceful, more stable” (in general) than any other counter examples.

                  In fact, if you wanted to actually “falsify” his claim, it would be to find an example of a heterogenous, multi-polar society that was More Peaceful than the examples he’s already given.

                  1. You keep doing that “falsifiability” thing. as though any time someone says something, a single example entirely contradicts it.

                    I don’t think you understand falsifiability. You are correct that it doesn’t apply to everything, but it applies in this case as I will show.

                    Not all claims are absolute claims (even when they superficially appear to be)

                    Wait, what? Where is this secret decoder ring that converts a universal quantification to an existential? Regardless of that, it’s not about All vs. There exists…it’s about deduction vs. induction.

                    I don’t know how true his point is – but i don’t see how the sengoku period necesarily means japan was necessarily MORE prone to war than any other civilization on earth. [etc.]

                    That’s not what I’m saying. When one makes a claim “The first is to have a very homogeneous society like Japan. When people are alike, they tend to get along better,” that is inductive reasoning. Derp made a general claim (when people are alike…) from a specific observation (the history of Japan). It is completely proper to employ falsification to an inductive argument. That’s how you prove whether it is right or wrong.

                    Again, your point would be correct if this were a deductive argument, but it isn’t; and if I may be so bold, I think your confusion of the two might be where your hang up is.

                  2. In fact, if you wanted to actually “falsify” his claim, it would be to find an example of a heterogenous, multi-polar society that was More Peaceful than the examples he’s already given

                    Well, no. For inductive reasoning, it is sufficient to find a counter-example to falsify a claim. Furthermore, providing the example of a peaceful heterogeneous society would just mean that homogeneous society tend to be peaceful and heterogeneous ones are too. Perhaps war happens when a society is right on the line between homogeneous and heterogeneous. So providing that example would not falsify the claim.

              2. To expand, what I’m saying is that homogeneity is not a sufficient factor for reduction of conflict. Especially because homogeneity is relative. People are always going to find a way to distinguish themselves into smaller groups and then fight over it. Especially when religion is involved.

                1. To expand, what I’m saying is that homogeneity is not a sufficient factor for reduction of conflict.

                  That’s not so much an “expansion” as “something entirely different than what you actually said before”.

                  And its not a critique of what he actually said so much as an entirely separate argument which also begs for examples.

                  sure= “homogeneity is not a sufficient factor for reduction of conflict.””

                  but his argument already said there were multiple ways a given society could be “less prone to conflict”. He never said, “this the one (and only) factor which my argument relies on”.

                  You’re basically making a different point, which may or may not be entirely consistent with what he already claimed

                  1. That’s not so much an “expansion” as “something entirely different than what you actually said before”.

                    No, it is the corollary of the falsification of Derp’s inductive reasoning. Again, I hope you don’t take this the wrong way, but you’re mistaken because you seem to not understand the difference between deductive and inductive (and abductive, maybe?) reasoning and how to evaluate inductive arguments. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m correct, but right now you’re arguing I said “red” when all this time I’ve been saying “green”.

        3. Last I heard the people trying to free syria were cutting the heads off of 8 year old boys and then arguing about how they were going to cook them, boiled or roasted.

  16. Would have been more fun with no cops there.

  17. He added, “America has always been first at genocide, at slavery, at exploitation, at destruction of the environment.”

    This person is gone. There’s no return from that kind of stupid.

    1. This kind of stupid?

      Making revolution against a powerful and vicious enemy?and going on from there to bring into being a whole new world, without exploitation and oppression?is an incredibly challenging and complex process. Such a revolution requires leadership; it requires an organization with a sweeping vision, a scientific method to analyze reality and how to go about changing it, and serious discipline.

      -Commies don’t do exploitation and oppression.
      -Commies do reality very well.

      The scientific analysis of reality sounds like some shit out of Scientology. These people are the Scientology of Communism.

      1. The Communists parties of yore were always keen to bill themselves as science minded rationalists while they forced farmers to grow the crops closer together in an attempt to boost yields or while they asserted the superiority of a committee of technocrats in place of a market, in figuring out how many pairs of socks the subject society would need to consume in a year.

        The fact that there are still communists despite it’s history tells me that stupidity is effectively immortal. The left represents intellectual entropy, it’s easier for nature and society to produce stupid humans and harder to produce smart ones. It’s consistent with nature.

        1. The dream of communism- peace and plenty for all, no more rich or poor- is so appealing that no matter how badly or reliably it fails, there will always be people who want to give it a try. The main lesson of history is that people fail to learn from history.

          1. Most people are incapable of or unwilling to transcend lizard brain for more than a few seconds at a time. When you function day-in and day-out using only your primitive emotions as a guide, “dreams” and “intentions” outweigh rational critiques.

            tl;dr it’s all about teh FEELZ

    2. This is why we never should have embargoed Cuba. In fact, we should have been offering scholarships for everything from college sabbaticals to work-study programs. And we should expand to include Venezuela. “Visit the Worker’s Paradise! BYO toilet paper.”

      1. Bring a double pack of Charmin and become God Emperor of Maracaibo.

        1. ^I admit that I lolled at this.

  18. Certainly Cleveland’s fire ordinances prohibit open burning in city limits. That should apply to flags as well as any other combustible material.

    1. Not sure if this sarcasm, but yes.

  19. ‘Black Olives Matter’: New Mexico restaurant sparks outrage for pun playing off protest slogan amid nationwide outcry over recent fatal shootings of two black men by police officers

    Paisano’s Italian restaurant has come under fire for putting ‘Black Olives Matter – Try Our Tapenade’ on its marquee sign
    Several people called the sign ‘insensitive’ and in ‘very poor taste’ because of the play on words regarding the Black Lives Matter movement
    Owner, Ricky Camuglia, said they thought ‘it was a cute play on words’
    The pun was used to promote the restaurant’s special ‘Ahi tuna’ dish
    Camuglia took down half the sign and removed the Facebook post
    He said ‘if that offends some people, a statement about black olives, that somebody needs to reevaluate their politically correct meter’
    The sign sparked outrage amid the nationwide outcry over the recent fatal shootings of black men by police officers

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..icers.html

    That Ahi looks really fucking good. I want some. Nice and rare. Yum.

    1. This is awesome. I saw a picture of a dog wearing a “black labs matter” shirt sitting next to another lab wearing a “all labs matter” shirt. Oh, the possibilities.

    2. ALL Olives Matter.

      I awoke to this shitshow in my inbox this morning.

      I wonder when the whole BLM thing will jump the shark.

      1. Yeah, I’m not reading that. Cliff notes?

        1. -Vague praise of BLM for being technologically savvy.
          -Widely panned in the comments.
          -People commenting on professional networking sites either have reasonable written communication skills or absolutely no written communication skills. There is no middle ground.

      2. Some of my favorites are the green ones stuffed with bleu cheese at the local grocery’s olive bar. Stuff will make your nose hairs curl. Yum.

        1. I’m not a huge martini fan, but if I notice that the bar is using bleu cheese-stuffed olives, I order one posthaste.

          1. That sounds good.

      3. I wonder when the whole BLM thing will jump the shark.

        Back when the first guy typed it?

    3. The sign sparked outrage

      Outrage being a commodity so much overbought, that piles of it just lie around in warehouses waiting to catch fire.

  20. Repost of shit clacked off my tappers:

    I promote the rejection of ALL religions. I also appreciate greatly the idea that ALL religions should operate within the boundaries of a free society with peace and fluidity. I will not, however, condone the appropriation of adult freedom by sharia or Jesus or the motherfucking Chinese.

    Please praise Jesus, Mohamama, Buddha, Space Dandelions, and Spaghetti Bowls in your thousands of kneeling carpet temples….

    Please don’t allow your bibles, texts, doctrines, and books to attach themselves to insane people that wish to kill free earth for the furtherance of your lovely spaces.

    Freedom doesn’t need your gods. Your gods together need freedom. Respect freedom. And you will ALL live the longest life possible to attain the greatest tunnel to your deepest heavens. No bombs necessary and I’m talking about you Mohamama and your fucking retard armies because Catholics and Christians deal with this shit they don’t kill over it.

    Christ, when will Islam turn its corner?

    The earth will get all Jew and Jesus… Islam just went mainstream like motherfucking Jew films and John.

    1. I approve this warbled record.

    1. thankfully, I’m cool like dat often. I burn my shit way too often but I refuse to claim so much coolness in the shadows of tall and knowing oaks that rise gleaming eye like from the edges of the sills I peer out upon at even this very moment as the shiba acts like his ninja bitch ass wants to flagrantly foul my ass upon the carpet like a goddamn god dog ninja. FUCK SHIBA ATTACK!!!

    2. Twitter video playback doesn’t work in my browser.

      1. Some Asian kid’s sitting in front of his webcam. He lights a cigarette by sticking his finger into a flaming drink of some sort and carrying the flame upon his finger to the cigarette at his mouth. Seconds later, he tries to lift the drink to sample it, but he spills it on his crotch, which sets alight. He and some off-camera person then attempt to put it out, but it doesn’t work, and fire looks like it’s spreading.

          1. “Fake and Bake”, amirite??

            /high fives…

      2. Just grab the scroll thingie and move it yourself.

  21. “America has always been first at genocide, at slavery, at exploitation, at destruction of the environment.”
    Lol, wot?
    1. Genocide- Israelites, Mongols, etc.
    2. Slavery- Egyptians, Persians, etc.
    3. Exploitation- what does this mean?
    4. Destruction of the environment- Easter Island, forests of Lebanon, etc.

    He’s stoopit, but I respect his right to burn a piece of cloth.

    1. 4. Modern China, full stop

      1. Yeah I referencing nations/cultures older than the US, since he said “first”, although I know that’s not how he meant it.

    2. Are you suggesting that the ancient Israelites (assuming you’re referencing the OT) practiced genocide better than the Mongol hordes? Or the Nazis? Or the Turks?

      Or are you making a sarcastic reference pointing out that if the modern “Israel-lites” actually wanted to exterminate the Palestinians as the left so often bleats about in various fora, it would take them less than a fortnight to do so?

      1. Oh, I should read the whole comment string before posting. You meant “first-first”, not “first”. Still would hesitate using the OT as an historical source for “genocide” as we now use the term.

  22. Burning the flag is protected. Starting a fire in the middle of a crowded public space is not. Apparently one of the protesters caught fire. I’m assuming he was from Florida.

    1. BURN THEM ALL.

    2. +1 Darwin Award

    3. I dunno. Maybe the best course of action would have been to let them get on with it, and when the city kids burning cloth in their hand from the bottom up get singed, bring out the fire extinguishers and solve everyone’s problems.

    4. That’s not fair. He very well could have been from southern Georgia.

  23. So apparently communists are also doing everything they can to make people vote for Trump.

  24. Some guy grazes his cattle for 30 years on federal land and then has his followers point their weapons at BLM officials. That’s ok.

    Some guy burns a colored piece of cloth on a sidewalk. Throw that fucker in jail.

    That’s libertarianism for you. The latter guy just doesn’t have an official right-wing political cause-de-celebre so he can just get ass-fucked.

    1. This can’t possibly be an actual person. The retardation is brutally difficult to witness.

      1. Reality is not optional. Steel yourself, hide your cake, and don’t look away.

      2. He used to try harder, in the Long Long Ago.

    2. Do you want to go catch a movie sometime?

      1. He’d settle for a rape-fantasy porno, I think, being a rabid pinko.

    3. Some guy burns a colored piece of cloth on a sidewalk. Throw that fucker in jail.

      That’s libertarianism for you.

      haha_o_wow.jpg

  25. “As supporters of the flag burners chanted ‘America was never great,'”

    So that means that the Obama admin is/was never great, which means Obama is not great, which means a black president was not great, which means a black man was not great, and so on…Wow, the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA is pretty racist!

    Prog logic is fun, ain’t it?

  26. “As supporters of the flag burners chanted ‘America was never great,'”

    So that means that the Obama admin is/was never great, which means Obama is not great, which means a black president was not great, which means a black man was not great, and so on…Wow, the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA is pretty racist!

    Prog logic is fun, ain’t it?

  27. America IS, generally, the volcano of pulsing livid reality jizzing forever on earth…

    However, some of you in this place seem to think that America is infallible and without misdirection.

    America is a collective human rag tossed about by the storms of politics. America is not an unearthly angelic Moon set in Reasonoid mathematics. America is a TERM.

    AMERICA IS A TIME.

    America is the moment your breathe swings from whatever goddamn pulpit or philosopher you all jerk a dick or clit to.

    America is ALSO very FUCKING fragile.

    America is the sweetest old lady you never met in the deepest galaxy surrounded by the loveliest dreams living in the armpit of lions.

    1. However, America is not perfect. And…. Your fucking America can fall like every motherfucking civilization before her….
      you honestly think AMERICA can NEVER fail? THIS IS EXACTLY WHY LIBERTARIANS EXIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      WE LOVE AMERICA MORE THAN THE MOTHERFUCKING AMERICANS!!!!!!!!
      LIBERTARIANS ARE FOR AMERICA FAR FUCKING MORE THAN TRUMP!!!!!
      America is the cpu of logic.
      America is the earth’s core.
      American code is not perfect, whores.
      Let’s make it even fucking better.

      1. Sadly, libertarians will never have any influence because influence requires power, and libertarians aren’t the kind of people who seek power. So libertarianism will always fail.

        1. Eh, things *can* get better when a critical mass of people realize that life tends to work better when people generally live and let live. It doesn’t happen very often.

          1. Mass sanity is indeed rare.

  28. “Then, a group of very loud homophobic and racist Christians with megaphones arrived on the scene and were quickly surrounded by police from the crowds they were antagonizing.”

    Why say they were homophobic, racist, and Christians?

    Why not just say they were Christians for short like all the cool kids do?

  29. Jonathan Haidt explains modern progthink:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3z6IZdeZYA

    My own theory is that progs in what I call Topsy-Turvy land. In Topsy-Turvy land, all evil comes from white men. Even if you can present them with an example of some other group doing evil, they will inevitably claim they are only doing that because evil white men *provoked* them.

  30. Pam Bondi’s upset about cocaine coming in to Florida? I’d wager she did her fair share down in Hogtown back in the ’80s.

  31. I knew without checking the link that it was Revolution Books. I’ve almost never seen any customers in it. I can’t figure out how it stays in business. Are there any communist sugar daddy countries left?

    1. There’s a huge endowment of cash left by rich dead lefties for commie causes. I wouldn’t be surprised that a commie bookstore could operate “in the red” indefinitely.

      1. I see what you did there.

  32. Wheee!!!

  33. I know communists like to say that it *could* work, it’s just never been properly implemented before. But can anyone explain what their response must be to the fact that communism, even in its impossible but perfect iteration, only attempts to deal with economic inequality? How exactly are the communists going to prevent people from being smarter or prettier or stronger or taller than other people? Do they support hitting every newborn in the face with a shovel?

    1. Nah, they’ll just slap some handicap bags and radios on the stronger kids and prevent people from giving Wilt Chamberlain any quarters. EZPZ

      1. I’m not sure that really covers it though. What that’s saying, is people are given jobs based on their ability, but everyone gets all the same stuff. So smart people become doctors, dumb people sweep floors, but both live in the same apartment and eat the same food.

        What that doesn’t address, is the way that smarter people are socially put on a pedestal. How doctors are admired while people snicker at janitors. How more people are attracted to beautiful people than ugly people. Inequality will still exist in an ideal communist utopia. It just wouldn’t be economic inequality.

        1. WELL AT LEAST THEY’RE TRYING YOU FUCKING BUZZKILL

        2. jk

          I can’t be asked to actually do the entire, “pretend you’re a retard-communist”-routine today. no energy for it.

          1. Haha, that’s OK. I wouldn’t expect the typical communist supporter to have an actual answer anyway. I was just thinking maybe someone on here had actually read Marx before (I haven’t) and he perhaps covered it himself. I doubt it though. For me, it’s clearly the largest oversight and biggest failing of the whole thing because it’s a failure on the conceptual level.

            1. Meh, back when Marx wrote, people were pretty similar. They were all kinda ugly from poor nutrition and hard lives, except the rich, who ate better and lived lives of leisure. And the rich tended to be taller, also due to nutrition.
              In Marx’s day, class really was the cause of a lot of inequality that today we would not call economic inequality, but back then was often caused by economic inequality.

              1. Also, intelligence, education, social respect, etc, were all heavily influenced by class.

    2. “How exactly are the communists going to prevent people from being smarter or prettier or stronger or taller than other people?

      Smarter, prettier, stronger, etc. these are all absurd notions to real communists.

      People who imagine they’re smarter than others should be ashamed of themselves.

      The new communist man isn’t ruled by these corrupt notions of one person being better than another.

      The winning of a gold medal brings glory to the system and government that created the athlete–not the athlete.

      The only thing that individuals should really be rewarded for is a willingness to sacrifice individual gains for the greater good of everyone else.

      That you’re bogged down in your thinking by notions like “smarter” and “prettier” means you need to be reeducated.

      That’s why the bourgeois need to go out and do peasant work.

      Don’t worry, eventually you’ll come to think like a good peasant should–that you’re no smarter than anyone else. And the longer you think one person is prettier than another or that it matters if they are, the longer you’ll need to do peasant work. Some people need to stay peasants forever.

      1. Nailed it. People who want to cure cancer are pussies.

  34. We can even create playlists of them so it will be very easy to find our videos which we like. We can also download those videos and can watch them offline. Showbox for pc

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.