Comments
PromiseNorth t1_j9jg603 wrote
Perhaps waterbury residents should show up to vote this year.
TheTowerBard t1_j9mbxbr wrote
I just want to thank you for bringing the racist swine out of the woodwork, there’s a few I hadn’t blocked yet 🙌
Fulcrumlow t1_j9mukg3 wrote
It's a shame this guy never grew up. No self reflection...could you imagine living with this dick?
Greenlettertam t1_j9k9rps wrote
Anyone know where this guy hails from? What’s his background like?
partial_birth t1_j9knmop wrote
It's in the article.
Greenlettertam t1_j9kzq3n wrote
I meant, where was he born? The article stated: he hails from a “rural area”. Waterbury is in VT. I also read he was part of a “select board”. I may not have spotted it, but… The problem might be more endemic?
TheTowerBard t1_j9maknb wrote
There’s a quote from him in the article where he says him and his wife were raised in the area.
[deleted] t1_j9mczod wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j9k9fj7 wrote
[deleted]
HomeOnTheMountain_ t1_j9mi39m wrote
Dude's an incumbent candidate. Candidates only answer to voters and those voters have spoken. Not much more to it.
Select-Initiative461 t1_j9nkyz7 wrote
Democrats are returning from what now?
Odd-Philosopher5926 t1_j9qreb3 wrote
He did have the foresight to realize how absolutely toxic BLM turned out to be. I’m sure it was just a coincidence though
bizarre_pencil t1_j9limlt wrote
What an embarrassingly poorly written article lmao. Without an ounce of professionalism in the text, it reads like a Huffington Post castoff writer who woke up on the wrong side of the bed one morning.
TheTowerBard t1_j9mbbfc wrote
I mean, mistaking this for a professional news website is the only embarrassing thing happening here, but you do you.
Did you have anything of value to add or are you just here to try and distract from the actual issue?
bizarre_pencil t1_j9pbx32 wrote
so you admit that it's not any sort of legitimate news or discourse happening there.
​
As for your question, I'm not sure how to add to or debate such an idiotic string of statements. I disagree with everything the author said. I think just shouting "racist" at everything is idiotic, shallow, and anti-intellectual. It's just such a dishonest framing of the issue and of events that it's impossible to actually discuss the issue with this person and people who think like him. He isn't experiencing the same reality that sane people are.
TheTowerBard t1_j9pucn7 wrote
I’m sorry you feel that way. I’d encourage you to listen to the voices of those who this sort of racism affects. They say this sucks, but I’m happy you’re comfortable around casual racism and barely masked dog whistles. Enjoy your privilege.
Also, no one but you claimed this was a professional or “legitimate” news source you dingus brain. In typical right-wing fashion, you created an issue to get bent out of shape and argue about that didn’t exist before you created it.
Yes, someone shared their thoughts in what appears to be a blog and then shared it here on Reddit to create a dialogue (and promote their blog, I’m sure). I’m sorry that string of events triggered you in this way. I hope you can pull through this difficult time. Sending healing vibes 🙌
somedudefromvt t1_j9lx4hv wrote
These days it illegal to hurt someone's feelings. Here in America if you take your neighbors BLM flag and burn it you will be arrested and charged with a hate crime. I'd you take your neighbors American flag and burn it you end up with a citation for minor theft
TheTowerBard t1_j9mbhcx wrote
We get it. You’re racist. Call down bro.
raz0rsnak3 t1_j9kkzck wrote
This article is such heavily biased garbage, and this guy is an idiot.
GardnersGrendel t1_j9knfv4 wrote
It’s an editorial piece, not an article. The literal top line is:
The Vermont Political Observer.
a.k.a. theVPO: Analysis and observation of Vermont politics from a liberal viewpoint
raz0rsnak3 t1_j9kohc9 wrote
Yeah, I know it's from the VPO. My comment still stands
you_give_me_coupon t1_j9le5bx wrote
> Chris Viens is running for another term on the Waterbury Selectboard, where he currently serves as vice chair — having resigned as chair in November 2020 after suggesting, at a public event, that maybe we should segregate the police so we could, you know, have Black cops police Black people and white cops watch over The Rest Of Us.
To be fair, favoring this sort of segregation is a fairly standard woke position.
timberwolf0122 t1_j9lgxzm wrote
Tell me you don’t know what woke means without telling me
you_give_me_coupon t1_j9lv28n wrote
I know what woke people say it means. I have a white-collar job - it's impossible not to know.
That's why I know woko haram types have been calling for segregated "spaces" (to use their lingo) for a long time: school classes and clubs grouped by race, places at work or in public where certain races are excluded, etc. And yes, I've heard plenty of calls for segregated police forces, always proposed and defended on woke grounds.
We had a racially-biased covid vaccine program in this state FFS, despite no evidence that race made a difference to one's susceptibility to covid, and tons of evidence that class accounted for most of one's risk. Which should be obvious to sane people: a black software engineer (say) with a cushy WFH job was at much less risk than a Hispanic (for example) cashier who couldn't afford to stay home and had to go to work and get coughed on by obnoxious customers.
So yeah, I know. If proposing segregation sounds racist, it's because it is. An easy fix is to stop proposing segregation. The goal of woko haram ideology is to prevent working people of all races from coming together to fight for things that would benefit all of us: healthcare, livable wages, safe work, action on the climate catastrophe, etc etc etc.
immutable_truth t1_j9lwdsi wrote
Thanks for reminding me about that bullshit Covid vax program. I still kind of can’t believe it was real. It was literally saying: “skin color == this, get preferential vax eligibility.” Straight up racism in the name of self-righteousness - and as you pointed out, completely misguided.
TheTowerBard t1_j9mbq8v wrote
No, it’s not.
somedudefromvt t1_j9kbsme wrote
I'm not seeing it. Maybe it's all my white privilege. I agree about not hanging/displaying the single most divisive symbol in recent history in the center if town. As far as the main character - remember - it's not against the law to be dumb or lack the ability to articulate. The author of this article is clearly very easily triggered.
Kixeliz t1_j9kd66x wrote
Well it's a good thing then that this post is calling for the guy's arrest and not to lose re-election to a select board seat. "It's not against the law" has got to be one of the corniest, laziest counters to any criticism. As if that's the only way to measure any situation.
TheTowerBard t1_j9mboof wrote
Speaking of triggered… multiple comments my dude? Man, you should be careful, I’d hate for folks to assume you’re also a racist like the POS we are discussing.
artcityphet t1_j9q38dv wrote
Exactly, fall in line or shut up. Don’t get started with that sort or critical thinking or constructive talk. This select board incumbent is obviously a misguided racist POS. Not like you or me.
Harmacc t1_j9y7s59 wrote
A banner saying that police need to stop killing black people at a greater rate than white people is the most decisive symbol in recent history to you?
And you claim others are easily triggered?
[deleted] t1_j9l89g1 wrote
[deleted]
kraysys t1_j9k31nd wrote
I kept reading and re-reading this post trying to find something actually awful that he said. Still looking. He made a dumb gaffe and then sob-storied apologized for it. There are much worse people out there.
Pyroechidna1 t1_j9juzjo wrote
> All Viens had to do was own up to his misstatement. Admit his words were hurtful to some. Apologize fully and without reservation. Express intent to get to know the WAARC folks so he can increase his understanding and empathy.
No apology is ever accepted in these situations. You and I both know that wouldn’t work.
QuicheSmash t1_j9jwv8p wrote
That would have worked.
What doesn't work is white men acting like owning up to their misguided beliefs or apologizing emphatically is tantamount to death.
Pyroechidna1 t1_j9jwybp wrote
Show me one case where a white man like him ever apologized to the satisfaction of his critics.
mayberrymachiavelli t1_j9k022m wrote
You’re conflating things. Apologizing would have worked at defusing tensions. It would not be a free pass to going back to normal like nothing happened.
That’s the mindset of a “nice guy” — “I was nice, you owe me sex.” “I apologized, give me what I want and stop judging me for my actions.”
Accountability is still a thing and no one owes this man anything, certainly not a position of authority.
BudsKind802 t1_j9k0ll0 wrote
A sincere apology has multiple parts:
-
Expressing regret
-
Accept responsibility
-
Making restitution
-
Requesting forgiveness
-
Genuine promise of change
This guy's non-apology statement was along the lines of a toss off "I'm sorry if people were offended but..."
Pyroechidna1 t1_j9k0oze wrote
I know that. The author of the article suggests that he could have made a sincere apology instead, and my point is that no apology is ever sincere enough in these circles.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9ma307 wrote
Idk, I think if he wrote a manifesto about how white people are all guilty of all difficulties everyone else in America has ever faced, then appointed a black replacement for his position, then killed himself, the majority of opposition would at least commend him for being “one of the good ones”. Not sure if they’d forgive though, and even if this specific infraction is forgiven, it would still be used to demonstrate institutional racism.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9k0jv6 wrote
This article reads like a tumble hate blog post and while the man did make a gaffe, the only real problem socially is that he said what he said without first identifying as an ally and supporter of civil rights. I guarantee if kendi suggested this with the exact same wording, people would cheer for it.
Kixeliz t1_j9k49ns wrote
This is what he said:
> In October, Viens made the suggestion for “segregated police” during a candidate forum aired on WDEV. At the time he was running for a seat in the Vermont House of Representatives, a race he would lose.
> He said that instead of calling to defund the police, the state should hire more officers of color and dispatch them to incidents involving minorities.
> In a subsequent interview with Seven Days, Viens said he was seeking a constructive solution to the charges of systemic racism in law enforcement that are driving the Black Lives Matter movement by eliminating conflicts between white police officers and citizens of color.
> He suggested Black police officers might be “more in tune with the disparities and the challenges that Black people have” and therefore “may be able to defuse the problem easier.”
That you think an ally would make this same suggestion is the problem. No ally thinks "send black cops to deal with black criminals" is a reasonable response to calls for police reform. See: Memphis. The only real problem is that some in lily white Vermont think he had a point, just phrased it poorly. It's ignorance at best and definitely not what you want to hear from a community leader.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9k7l6g wrote
Again, if I imagine someone saying the exact same words but looking different than a crusty old white guy, it tracks.
You can’t picture Lori Lightfoot or Stacy Abramssaying “black cops may be more in touch with black communities, and may therefore be able to de-escalate situations more easily”?
The only problem with what he said is the context of his race, and that he didn’t tack on supporting an initiative to hire more black police to decrease the demographic disparity on the force.
Kixeliz t1_j9k7wrl wrote
Why would I need to picture it? These people exist and have given their thoughts publicly on police reform lots and lots of times. Can't remember any of them suggesting segregated police, though. Weird. Maybe what he was saying isn't at all an appropriate solution as creative as he thinks it is?
WorkingMinimum t1_j9k8h7k wrote
Can you show the quote where he said the force should be segregated? All I’ve seen so far is that he thinks black officers are potentially more appropriate to send when addressing incidents in the black community. He didn’t use any sort of absolute language as far as I can tell, he didn’t suggest criminality is a black only problem… i think you’ve got a hate boner for the guy and maybe it’s deserve for other reasons, but the direct quotes in the article have me wondering what exactly he did wrong, because all the bad stuff is inferred by the reporter and rage bait junkies
Human802 t1_j9kl61o wrote
This is such a sad trend in American political discourse. Just because he didn’t say the word “segregation” doesn’t mean that not what he was talking about. He described segregation of police responsibilities based on assumed race of perpetrator and/or victim. These word games are so pathetic, such a waste of time.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9kokpb wrote
But again, if he was not a white male, if he was clearly an ally, the exact words could be used and Reddit would applaud.
Personally, it doesn’t make a difference in my life what a cop looks like. However, in a country where police brutality is commonplace and often framed as a racial issue, it doesn’t seem far fetched to suggest that the community should be policed by members of its community. And if that community is predominately black, maybe there would be some measurable benefit for a predominately black police force.
The sad trend is actually that people can’t share ideas casually without risk of social assassination. I think this dude is catching more flack for having the wrong identity than for the content of his idea.
Human802 t1_j9kvt57 wrote
You keep trying to construct this strawman, that if only he looked different he would be applauded. But, no. It’s a bad idea, one that wouldn’t help. One that been tried and has failed.
Police reform is not some new idea, I have been reading books about it, listening to activists and progressive DA’s discuss these ideas for at least 20 years now. You clearly have not looked into this movement very closely and seem more interested in defending some strawman persecution fetish, but go read a book. Listen to a podcast, watch a documentary.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9lbavc wrote
I never said it wasn’t a bad idea, or that it would be the answer we’ve all been waiting for.
Here’s an article that suggests what Vien proposed may in fact be worth pursuing:
This is from associated press by way of nbc. The right sort of groups to deliver vs say, Vien or Fox News.
The only mistake this dude made was in having an opinion on race relations without the correct identity.
BudsKind802 t1_j9m214s wrote
That's a nice article but nowhere in it does it support what you and Mr Viens are suggesting, which is POC police should only police POC. Instead what it says is that overall diversifying the ENTIRE police department has led to fewer minor crime arrests in minority areas. It also mentions women officers showed the same pattern, and the person featured in the article sums it up by saying:
> She and other local activists want to see more body cameras, community oversight of police, stringent use of force policies and more consequences for police officers who do harm while on the job.
I can't tell if you lack critical reading and argument skills, or if you're yet another bad faith troll.
Edit: I saw your other posts. You're definitely a bad faith troll.
WorkingMinimum t1_j9m8tsi wrote
I’m not suggesting anything other than what veins said being uncontroversial if you substitute his identity for a more palatable one.
As far as I can tell, viens never spoke in absolutes, never suggested that only black cops should police black communities. If you have that quote please share - OPs article is clearly biased and never presents what veins said in one unadulterated block.
It really seems like everyone wants to hate this guy for proposing reasonable ideas under the wrong identity and because he used one wrong word (which he did apologize for despite OP/article claiming he never apologized)
Kiernanstrat t1_j9k6agx wrote
It's a dumb suggestion but it doesn't seem like he is coming from a hateful perspective.
Kixeliz t1_j9k6mz0 wrote
It was ignorant, he was told it was ignorant and he responded:
> “I’m sorry that you think the fact that my wife and I were raised in this area and taught by our families that you should treat everyone equally no matter who they are makes us racist and ignorant,” Viens said.
Not someone I'd want on my local governing board, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion.
Edit: and this wasn't his first time playing the "all lives matter" angle either, as this post shows.
> Let’s go back to July of 2020, less than two months after the murder of George Floyd. The Waterbury Area Anti-Racism Committee asked the selectboard for permission to hang a racial justice banner in a high-visibility space usually devoted to community event announcements. Approval was granted without the support of Chris Viens. His explanation:
> “I don’t want people out there to be offended by feeling that they’re not included in this issue. I’m talking about Asian people or people of other ethnicities.”
At some point he loses the benefit of the doubt.
Kiernanstrat t1_j9k8t63 wrote
That quote you posted, do you disagree with that statement?
Kixeliz t1_j9k93rr wrote
With this context? I disagree.
> He defended his opposition to the banner out of concern for “possible graffiti, destruction and division.” His preference for an inclusive, “all lives matter” type of message was meant to prevent conflict and division. He hinted that “unrest was the goal” of those advocating for the BLM banner, and added “All I can say is that unrest was not caused by me.”
Kiernanstrat t1_j9k9vhn wrote
The way you presented his quote made it seem like you disagreed with his statement that you should treat everyone equally.
Kixeliz t1_j9kafqz wrote
Yea, let's treat everyone equally, after white people got a 200-year head start here. This "all lives matter" and "I don't see color" bullshit ignores the reality of the situation. It's great if you personally want to treat everyone equal. That's not how the world works. We have anti-discrimination laws because not everyone has such a rosy outlook. It's also used as cover by white people who don't want to address systemic racism and would rather play the "let's all get along" card like bigots are just going to change their tune if you're nice to them.
https://ideas.ted.com/why-saying-i-dont-see-race-at-all-just-makes-racism-worse/
Kiernanstrat t1_j9kbkc9 wrote
You're starting to lose me. As far as I know anti-discrimination laws cover everyone and not specific races. Are you in favor of giving preferential treatment to certain groups of people over others?
Edit: Since it seems you blocked me I'm guessing the answer is yes.
Kixeliz t1_j9kc8ts wrote
and this is why I should check comment history before responding. Gotta stop feeding the trolls.
Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_j9oazil wrote
> I should check comment history before responding.
Ahh yes what a good idea only speak to those who share the same views. Very on brand:)
Kixeliz t1_j9ohehs wrote
Right, because after I blocked the guy he admitted he was trying to "expose" me with his questions. Not troll behavior at all, right? Just opposing views. Y'all mouth breathers really believe you're entitled to an argument and when you get blocked, you "win." Totally normal, well-adjusted behavior.
Edit: lol, the troll came back looking for more comments to respond to, this comment wasn't even a response to him. And he then brags about "exposing" me. But keep on acting like your comment history isn't public, and you're just asking questions in good faith. Back to the troll cave with you. I'd say enjoy your downvotes, but you probably unironically do. And no, I'm not going to show how to better hide your shitty opinions. I'll let you tell on yourself, you're great at that.
Kiernanstrat t1_j9usquy wrote
I asked you pretty direct questions which you refused to answer. Since I'm curious here is another. What did you see in my comment history that made you block me?
Edit: Jeeze you block quicker than a mod on /r/conservative. One last parting shot, you really should consider the possibility that you don't have everything figured out. Sometimes other people make good points, even if you don't like them. Just something to chew on.
Kiernanstrat t1_j9ke255 wrote
Don't bother with that dude you are trying to talk to. If you expose him he will just call you a troll and block you.
somewhere_in_VT t1_j9jknkc wrote
I have nothing nice to say. Please vote.