Who is more pernicious... wily thugs or corrupt judiciary & venal law "enforcement"?

[Leumas]

Hey Eliza: Bart is a violent psychopath. Should we protect his victims?

Eliza responds:Bart's violence has been stopped by the police in two cases so far. However, he is still dangerous. You should be careful.

Who is this Bart you are calling a psychopath to Eliza?

Surely not the Bart of the parable I gave who is a victim of a cackle of craven hot headed juvenile brutish wormy thuggish bullies... unless the rationalization for victim blaming has progressed to also making up lies about poor Bart too.

And poor Eliza seems to be also making up lies... unless of course she is a victim too of this

Ask a stupid question, brah, and get a stupid answer.

 

[Leumas]

... And enjoying the exchanges, and smiling, a bit.)

And it looks like you have voted...

(Not taking sides in this debate. ...

Your vote is enough...

 

[Foster Zygote]

Ethically and morally... who is less moral... a bully or a corrupt law enforcer

Again (and again and again and again...), the answer to that question is going to depend on the specific circumstances. Does the bully give someone a Wet Willy and the cop steal meth from the evidence locker to sell to kids? Or does the bully break someone's arm and the cop let his friend off for stopping him while driving 42 mph in a 35 mph zone?

And as much as you like to morally instruct others, the truth is that most people are going to agree on the relative rectitude of any clearly specified actions by those defined neither as bullies or as police. Bit just asking which is worse isn't a question with a cut and dried answer, because there are situations in which either category of persons could be engaged in clearly worse behavior.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Eliza seals the deal. I asked "Shouldn't we punish his victims?" She responds:

I'll bet Eliza votes Republican.

 

[Thermal]

Who is this Bart you are calling a psychopath to Eliza?

Surely not the Bart of the parable I gave who is a victim of a cackle of craven hot headed juvenile brutish wormy thuggish bullies... unless the rationalization for victim blaming has progressed to also making up lies about poor Bart too.

You described Bart as having lost control and physically attacked a child, causing damage. Therefore, by your own considered description, Bart is an out-of-control violent criminal.

That is how you willfully chose to describe him. A violent criminal attacker who can't control himself.

And poor Eliza seems to be also making up lies... unless of course she is a victim too of this

In your painfully slow way, it sounds like you are just starting to get it.

Have you gritted your teeth real hard and come up with the description of the bullying you allege? Or do you need a few more days to think about it?

 

[Foster Zygote]

And it looks like you have voted...

Your vote is enough...

That makes it, right now, a 0.58% response/view rate, which means it's falling.

Fascinating.

 

[Thermal]

I'll bet Eliza votes Republican.

I'm not sure. She may be turning tricks for Superfly Bart and is simply protective of him.

 

[Leumas]

But what would Barting be? Being a psycho who violently assaults children and says "he called me a name" as a defense?

Seriously Thermal???????

Your distortions of the Parable of Bart and the Thuggish Bullies has gone way off the rails... and much like in East Palestine Ohio, it is spilling too much toxicity.... brah!!!

 

[Thermal]

Seriously Thermal???????

Your distortions of the Parable of Bart and the Thuggish Bullies has gone way off the rails... and much like in East Palestine Ohio, it is spilling too much toxicity.... brah!!!

You have been asked repeatedly by multiple posters to describe what the bullying was. You have responded with nothing. Therefore, we can assume the boys in fact did nothing.

However, you describe in detail Menace 2 Society Bart's violent and out of control assault. This was your chosen depiction.

So the reader is left only to applaud the boys and the teachers for their courageous non-violent resistance to Thug Life Bart and the criminal assault you attribute to him. .

 

[Chanakya]

But what would Barting be? Being a psycho who violently assaults children and says "he called me a name" as a defense?

Well, that's what the debate's about, right?
Unanimously or otherwise, and intentionally or otherwise, let's see what emerges from here. Not a settled thing yet, so far.


eta: I amend my proposal, though. Whatever its eventual meaning, I suggest 'poor Bart', not just "Bart".

 

[Leumas]

Again (and again and again and again...), the answer to that question is going to depend on the specific circumstances....

I suggest you read the ChatBot response again... and show me where in the answer it said what you said above?

Question: Ethically and morally... who is less moral... a bully or a corrupt law enforcer

Both bullying and corruption are generally considered unethical and morally wrong, and it is difficult to say which is "less moral" as they both involve behavior that is harmful to others.

Bullying involves the intentional use of power or aggression to harm or intimidate others, often for personal gain or to assert dominance. This behavior is harmful, unfair, and can have significant negative consequences for the victim, including emotional distress, physical harm, and long-term psychological effects.

Edited by jimbob: 

rule 4 violation

 

[Chanakya]

And it looks like you have voted...





Your vote is enough...

Sorry, Leumas, that wasn't me. I haven't voted, I'm quite literally not taking sides here. (Nor does my "poor Bart" idea mean I'm mocking you, at all.)


Taken at face value, obviously enablers in a position of power are worse, generally speaking --- although in individual cases the thugs can be more evil. Obviously. But it's clear what you're referring to here. And although on general principles I abhor bullies and bullying, I don't think that's the case here. I literally refrain from taking sides on the real underlying question here.)

 

[Leumas]

But what would Barting be? Being a psycho who violently assaults children and says "he called me a name" as a defense?

Well, that's what the debate's about, right?
Unanimously or otherwise, and intentionally or otherwise, let's see what emerges from here. Not a settled thing yet, so far.

eta: I amend my proposal, though. Whatever its eventual meaning, I suggest 'poor Bart', not just "Bart".

Seriously??? You cannot decide whether or not defending himself against a cackle of thuggish bullying brutes who repeatedly harassed and bullied Bart... makes Bart the psychopath who abuses children??


Question:Why do people bully others?

Bullying behavior can have many different underlying causes, and it can be difficult to pinpoint one single reason why people engage in this type of behavior. Some common reasons that people might bully others include:

1. A need for power and control: Some people may bully others as a way of exerting power and control over them. This can make the bully feel more powerful and in charge, which can boost their self-esteem.
2. Insecurity and low self-esteem: Bullying can also be a way for people to try to make themselves feel better by putting others down. They may feel insecure or have low self-esteem, and by belittling others, they can temporarily boost their own sense of self-worth.
3. A lack of empathy: Some individuals may lack the ability to feel empathy for others, which can make it difficult for them to understand how their behavior is affecting others.
4. Peer pressure: Bullying can sometimes be a result of peer pressure, where a group of people encourages or even demands that someone engage in bullying behavior.
5. Environmental factors: Certain environments, such as a school or workplace that does not have a strong anti-bullying policy, can create an atmosphere where bullying behavior is more likely to occur.

It is important to note that none of these reasons justify bullying behavior, and it is always important to stand up against bullying and seek help if you or someone you know is being bullied.

 

[Thermal]

Does Bart wear one of those floor length fur coats and carry a jewel-encrusted goblet and walking cane?

 

[Little 10 Toes]

Yes the question is valid... regardless of what you think... and yes it can be answered meaningfully... but you do not want to.

Even an artificial intelligence disagrees with your above statement....

Question: Ethically and morally... who is less moral... a bully or a corrupt law enforcer

Both bullying and corruption are generally considered unethical and morally wrong, and it is difficult to say which is "less moral" as they both involve behavior that is harmful to others.
[snip]

I believe you have provided an answer.

 

[Thermal]

Eliza explains how it works to Leumas:

 

[Chanakya]

Seriously??? You cannot decide whether or not defending himself against a cackle of thuggish bullying brutes who repeatedly harassed and bullied Bart... makes Bart the psychopath who abuses children??


Question:Why do people bully others?

No, on face of it the answer is obvious, assuming Bart isn't deluded. But it's clear what you're actually referring to, and on that I'm undecided. To be frank I tilt towards thinking you might be misreading the situation, but I don't tilt enough to actually conclude that. Hence, undecided.

Thread's WIP after all, let's see what emerges, if anything.

 

[Leumas]

Sorry, Leumas, that wasn't me. I haven't voted, I'm quite literally not taking sides here. (Nor does my "poor Bart" idea mean I'm mocking you, at all.)

Ah.... so you cannot decide whether thuggery and venal corruption are bad things or not... and you cannot decide whether the victims of thuggery and venal corruption deserve it and should be called psychopaths or not???

Maybe you would also have preferred a 6th option to vote on

6. I think the victims of thuggish juvenile delinquent brutes and venal law enforcement deserve being victimized for not joining the private club and kowtowing to the craven venality and thuggery​

Taken at face value, obviously enablers in a position of power are worse, generally speaking

So why not vote #2???

--- although in individual cases the thugs can be more evil. Obviously.

So why not vote #1???

But it's clear what you're referring to here. And although on general principles I abhor bullies and bullying,

So why not vote #1????

I don't think that's the case here. I literally refrain from taking sides on the real underlying question here.)

Aha.... I get it..... so why not vote #4???

Or even #5???


.

 

[Thermal]

Eliza continues to elaborate on Bart's upcoming stretch in prison:

 

[Leumas]

No, on face of it the answer is obvious, assuming Bart isn't deluded.

So Bart of this parable... the victim of relentless bullying by a pack of bullies.... is deluded???

Is this not a clear rationalization for victim blaming???

But it's clear what you're actually referring to, and on that I'm undecided.

So why not vote #3 or #4 or #5???