Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Not Al-Qaeda
Mar 20, 2012


Hammy posted:

I didn't really like the Chardene subplot. Having the stripper with a heart of gold fall in love with the detective investigating her gangster boyfriend felt a little canned to me. Even though it's not that unrealistic it seemed out of place on this show.

It was also kinda creepy of lester to hit on someone he has "power" over

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Jerusalem
May 20, 2004

Would you be my new best friends?



forever whatever posted:

Well I suppose I never looked at that particular subplot through that lens. I was in the Army and was in Iraq in 04-05 and became pretty anti-interventionist as a result of what I saw as a complete breakdown in security over there as the result of a lie. In season 3 of The Wire, the parallels are so vivid that Slim's little speech to Avon towards the end, "this is war, once you in it, you in it. If it's over a lie, than you fight on that lie", or words to that effect, seemed almost heavy handed. I suppose that season 5's serial killer plot could be another example of the unintended consequence of the government using lies to pursue major goals.

I forget which season it's in, it's probably season 3 since that was the most obvious in terms of commentary on the Invasion of Iraq, but I've always loved the section where Bodie runs off the rival dealers who have been selling "Bin Ladens" and starts selling his inferior "WMDs", insisting that it's just as good and what the junkie REALLY wants.

algebra testes
Mar 5, 2011




Lipstick Apathy

I like when they're selling Death Grip.

And I imagine they get to the corners and there's actually nobody there to sell it to you.

ninja: Or the Barksdale gang breaks up like, three times but always gets together.

freebooter
Jul 7, 2009

AUSTRALIA
NEEDS
TURNBULL


Not Al-Qaeda posted:

It was also kinda creepy of lester to hit on someone he has "power" over

And is about 30 years older than

MrBling
Aug 21, 2003

Oozing machismo

The various names for the drugs are great.

In one of the seasons they're selling Greenhouse Gas.

"Greenhouse gas is hot, yo!"

denzelcurrypower
Jan 28, 2011


You probably know this, but heroin is actually marketed like that on the streets. I dunno about actually calling it by name, but the single servings of drugs are branded with stamps ala WMDs, Barack Obama, grim reaper, etc. Look up heroin stamp bags if you're interested. As always the hilarity of the wire is rooted in realism.

Asbury
Mar 23, 2007
Probation
Can't post for 3447 days!


Hair Elf

Simon's weighing in on the Baltimore riots: http://davidsimon.com/baltimore/

Philthy
Jan 28, 2003



Pillbug

MoosetheMooche posted:

You probably know this, but heroin is actually marketed like that on the streets. I dunno about actually calling it by name, but the single servings of drugs are branded with stamps ala WMDs, Barack Obama, grim reaper, etc. Look up heroin stamp bags if you're interested. As always the hilarity of the wire is rooted in realism.

Re: The Corner: A Year in the Life of an Inner-City Neighborhood by David Simon and Ed Burn

3Romeo posted:

Simon's weighing in on the Baltimore riots: http://davidsimon.com/baltimore/

I would have to disagree with him here. If change could happen with peace, it would have already. What we're seeing now is when democracy has failed, when civil rights have been lost with no one giving a rats rear end. Those that vote are not in the majority of the crimes being committed against them. I'm not condoning hurting of others, but the idea that peaceful protests will get from point A to B has been done and over with a long time ago.

Philthy fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Apr 28, 2015

willemw
Sep 30, 2006
very much so

Based on how I (and it seems most in this thread) see The Wire, I don't think I actually believe David Simon (as the writer of The Wire) believes in change, at least not on a fundamental level.

Jeffrey of YOSPOS
Dec 22, 2005

GET LOSE, YOU CAN'T COMPARE WITH MY POWERS


Yeah, there's nothing in the universe saying there must be a way to get to any arbitrary "Point B" - smashing 711s is unlikely to get you any closer.

NOTinuyasha
Oct 17, 2006

 


The Great Twist

In case you missed it, David Simon didn't waste much time taking a proverbial chainsaw to Martin O'Malley for the mess in Baltimore. As in, Martin O'Malley, the Baltimore politician Carcetti was more or less based on. They've exchanged shots in the past but it's one hell of an interview.

bucketybuck
Apr 8, 2012


Random thing about the wire that has bugged me for a while!

At the end of season 2 the Greek abandons millions of dollars worth of drugs in a container on the docks. The detail have found it, but seem totally bummed that the Greek got away and Daniels says something to the effect of "Would have been a hell of a case". Then they get some police guys to sit on the can for weeks/months hoping somebody come looking for it.

But, it still is a hell of a case for them! They can still take all those drugs out of the can and put it in front of the media and look like goddamn heroes! No different to the feds earlier in the season, they have a massive drugs haul that the bosses can shout to the heavens about and making the detail look kick rear end.

Yeah, I know it would be a hollow victory without nailing the Greek, but in terms of results netting those drugs was still a victory was it not?

Basebf555
Feb 29, 2008

The greatest sensual pleasure there is is to know the desires of another!



Fun Shoe

Philthy posted:

I would have to disagree with him here. If change could happen with peace, it would have already. What we're seeing now is when democracy has failed, when civil rights have been lost with no one giving a rats rear end. Those that vote are not in the majority of the crimes being committed against them. I'm not condoning hurting of others, but the idea that peaceful protests will get from point A to B has been done and over with a long time ago.

You aren't condoning the hurting of others but you are saying that peaceful protests don't work. So what are you saying?

Strawman
Feb 9, 2008

Tortuga means turtle, and that's me. I take my time but I always win.



Basebf555 posted:

You aren't condoning the hurting of others but you are saying that peaceful protests don't work. So what are you saying?

infrastructure, duh

isk
Oct 3, 2007

You don't want me owing you

bucketybuck posted:

Random thing about the wire that has bugged me for a while!

At the end of season 2 the Greek abandons millions of dollars worth of drugs in a container on the docks. The detail have found it, but seem totally bummed that the Greek got away and Daniels says something to the effect of "Would have been a hell of a case". Then they get some police guys to sit on the can for weeks/months hoping somebody come looking for it.

But, it still is a hell of a case for them! They can still take all those drugs out of the can and put it in front of the media and look like goddamn heroes! No different to the feds earlier in the season, they have a massive drugs haul that the bosses can shout to the heavens about and making the detail look kick rear end.

Yeah, I know it would be a hollow victory without nailing the Greek, but in terms of results netting those drugs was still a victory was it not?

This is the "dope on the table" theme that comes up periodically.

Toph Bei Fong
Feb 29, 2008

You can't see me at all...



Basebf555 posted:

You aren't condoning the hurting of others but you are saying that peaceful protests don't work. So what are you saying?

http://www.theonion.com/articles/baltimore-residents-urged-to-stay-indoors-until-so

quote:

BALTIMORE—Calling it an emergency measure designed to ensure public safety and order, Baltimore officials held a press conference Wednesday urging all residents to stay indoors until the natural evolution of social progress takes shape over the next century. “Given the ongoing situation in our city, we ask that everyone remain within their homes for the next 10 or 12 decades while the various barriers to equality and opportunity for all people are slowly chipped away,” said Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, adding that, in addition to shutting down public schools and the transportation system, the city had canceled work for all nonessential government employees while they wait for the arrival of fully protected civil rights and liberties expected sometime in the 22nd century. “As we continue to incrementally evolve into a completely free and fair society over the next 100 years, please do not venture outside unless it is absolutely necessary. Those who go out onto our streets before our social, economic, and political structures have undergone gradual reform over the course of several generations are doing so at their own risk.” Rawlings-Blake then encouraged residents to visit the city’s website for further information regarding what to do as they await the year 2115.

twerking on the railroad
Jun 23, 2007

Get on my level


3Romeo posted:

Simon's weighing in on the Baltimore riots: http://davidsimon.com/baltimore/

I just listened to a Rembert Browne podcast where a recurring idea was how much the panelists hated the wires influence. The idea being that for someone living in Baltimore, if life already feels hopeless, the wire just reinforces it and drags in poverty tourists who want to see your suffering for entertainment. And then you have people from the show telling you how to act as if they live your reality.

I think it's the most potent criticism of David Simon weighing in on things as he does.

Jerusalem
May 20, 2004

Would you be my new best friends?



To be fair to Simon, he lived there for over a decade working for the Sun and seeing everything that's in the show basically first hand (outside of the School system, which Burns was able to cover), so it's not like he was some outsider who came swinging into town one day.

Jeffrey of YOSPOS
Dec 22, 2005

GET LOSE, YOU CAN'T COMPARE WITH MY POWERS


Do people take wire vacations to go see riggs and calhoun in person?

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004




Jerusalem posted:

To be fair to Simon, he lived there for over a decade working for the Sun and seeing everything that's in the show basically first hand (outside of the School system, which Burns was able to cover), so it's not like he was some outsider who came swinging into town one day.

Also, "poverty tourism" and people suddenly feeling qualified to weigh in on what life on the street is like because they watched a TV show is probably not the effect that Simon was hoping for, I don't know that it's fair to blame him for that exactly.

Orange Devil
Sep 30, 2010

CUNT


Also people feeling more hopeless due to having the shittiness of the system they were already suffering under exposed isn't a reason to stop exposing.

Though it would've been nice if Simon would've endorsed an actual alternative rather than going right up to the edge and then turning out to be another liberal anyway.

Frostwerks
Sep 24, 2007

by Lowtax


Michael Kostroff, aka Levy, was in the most recent episode of Elementary.

Mu Zeta
Oct 17, 2002

Me crush ass to dust



New York actor appears in shows filmed in New York

YF-23
Feb 17, 2011

My god, it's full of cat!




To be entirely fair Simon isn't saying people shouldn't protest, he's saying they should protest non-violently. I personally disagree because civil disobedience without the threat of violence doesn't carry as much weight, but he's not saying that people should just stay home until things get better.

Basebf555
Feb 29, 2008

The greatest sensual pleasure there is is to know the desires of another!



Fun Shoe

YF-23 posted:

To be entirely fair Simon isn't saying people shouldn't protest, he's saying they should protest non-violently. I personally disagree because civil disobedience without the threat of violence doesn't carry as much weight, but he's not saying that people should just stay home until things get better.

Yea its a good thing guys like MLK Jr., Gandi, and Mandela knew how to kick some rear end when necessary, otherwise they wouldn't have accomplished anything.

ChairMaster
Aug 22, 2009

by R. Guyovich


Basebf555 posted:

Yea its a good thing guys like MLK Jr., Gandi, and Mandela knew how to kick some rear end when necessary, otherwise they wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Pretty sure nobody would have paid any attention to MLK if there weren't people like Malcolm X around.

Toph Bei Fong
Feb 29, 2008

You can't see me at all...



Basebf555 posted:

Yea its a good thing guys like MLK Jr., Gandi, and Mandela knew how to kick some rear end when necessary, otherwise they wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Because folks like Malcom X, and Chris Hani never accomplished anything alongside them, right? You've just gotta wait until enough white people feel guilty enough and stop hitting you?

The use of Mandela is a rather telling example, because while he was by all means an excellent example of the power of non-violent protest to win people over to your side, the rest of the ANC certainly isn't, and hasn't been since winning control of South Africa.

Basebf555
Feb 29, 2008

The greatest sensual pleasure there is is to know the desires of another!



Fun Shoe

Toph Bei Fong posted:

Because folks like Malcom X, and Chris Hani never accomplished anything alongside them, right? You've just gotta wait until enough white people feel guilty enough and stop hitting you?


Its a difference of philosophy. As a pacifist I support any form of protest that is peaceful, beyond that I don't believe that the ends ever justify the means.

YF-23
Feb 17, 2011

My god, it's full of cat!




Basebf555 posted:

Its a difference of philosophy. As a pacifist I support any form of protest that is peaceful, beyond that I don't believe that the ends ever justify the means.

Even peaceful protest, ultimately, depends on violence. You certainly cannot base your protest on the expectation that those with power will suddenly have a change of heart or a revelation as to why whatever is being protested is bad and become better people that will try to fix things. A protest, especially a mass protest, is meant to be a show of force, it is meant to show to those with power that they have something to be afraid of. And for that fear to exist you need violence, either actual violence of the threat of violence. And if every protest ends up being just a thing that the protesters ultimately walk away from then why should those with power care? A peaceful protest is much more likely to be successful if there's the fear that if no concessions are made it will turn violent.

twerking on the railroad
Jun 23, 2007

Get on my level


Toph Bei Fong posted:

The use of Mandela is a rather telling example, because while he was by all means an excellent example of the power of non-violent protest to win people over to your side, the rest of the ANC certainly isn't, and hasn't been since winning control of South Africa.

The invocation of Mandela here is interesting because he was a saboteur who destroyed property while taking care not to kill anyone. So far that seems to be the end result of the Baltimore unrest.

Basebf555
Feb 29, 2008

The greatest sensual pleasure there is is to know the desires of another!



Fun Shoe

YF-23 posted:

Even peaceful protest, ultimately, depends on violence. You certainly cannot base your protest on the expectation that those with power will suddenly have a change of heart or a revelation as to why whatever is being protested is bad and become better people that will try to fix things. A protest, especially a mass protest, is meant to be a show of force, it is meant to show to those with power that they have something to be afraid of. And for that fear to exist you need violence, either actual violence of the threat of violence. And if every protest ends up being just a thing that the protesters ultimately walk away from then why should those with power care? A peaceful protest is much more likely to be successful if there's the fear that if no concessions are made it will turn violent.

Well I certainly agree that a threat of violence has a higher chance of being successful because fear is a great motivator. I just don't believe in that kind of success and I think change is worthless if violence is used to affect it.

Toph Bei Fong
Feb 29, 2008

You can't see me at all...



Skeesix posted:

The invocation of Mandela here is interesting because he was a saboteur who destroyed property while taking care not to kill anyone. So far that seems to be the end result of the Baltimore unrest.

Yeah, the entire history of the Umkhonto we Sizwe is worth reading about, as it is a too often ignored aspect of his career in favor of the "Old Wise African Leader Who Speaks For Peace" persona he has come to embody in the world consciousness. People often forget why he was in prison, and why he was such a threat to the ruling SA government (which, make no mistake, were a bunch of racist monsters that needed to go).

Nelson Mandela posted:

At the beginning of June 1961, after a long and anxious assessment of the South African situation, I, and some colleagues, came to the conclusion that as violence in this country was inevitable, it would be unrealistic and wrong for African leaders to continue preaching peace and non-violence at a time when the government met our peaceful demands with force.

This conclusion was not easily arrived at. It was only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of political struggle, and to form Umkhonto we Sizwe. We did so not because we desired such a course, but solely because the government had left us with no other choice. In the Manifesto of Umkhonto published on 16 December 1961, which is exhibit AD, we said:

The time comes in the life of any nation when there remain only two choices – submit or fight. That time has now come to South Africa. We shall not submit and we have no choice but to hit back by all means in our power in defence of our people, our future, and our freedom.

[...]

The avoidance of civil war had dominated our thinking for many years, but when we decided to adopt violence as part of our policy, we realized that we might one day have to face the prospect of such a war. This had to be taken into account in formulating our plans. We required a plan which was flexible and which permitted us to act in accordance with the needs of the times; above all, the plan had to be one which recognized civil war as the last resort, and left the decision on this question to the future. We did not want to be committed to civil war, but we wanted to be ready if it became inevitable.

Four forms of violence were possible. There is sabotage, there is guerrilla warfare, there is terrorism, and there is open revolution. We chose to adopt the first method and to exhaust it before taking any other decision.

In the light of our political background the choice was a logical one. Sabotage did not involve loss of life, and it offered the best hope for future race relations. Bitterness would be kept to a minimum and, if the policy bore fruit, democratic government could become a reality. This is what we felt at the time, and this is what we said in our Manifesto (Exhibit AD):

"We of Umkhonto we Sizwe have always sought to achieve liberation without bloodshed and civil clash. We hope, even at this late hour, that our first actions will awaken everyone to a realization of the disastrous situation to which the Nationalist policy is leading. We hope that we will bring the Government and its supporters to their senses before it is too late, so that both the Government and its policies can be changed before matters reach the desperate state of civil war."

The initial plan was based on a careful analysis of the political and economic situation of our country. We believed that South Africa depended to a large extent on foreign capital and foreign trade. We felt that planned destruction of power plants, and interference with rail and telephone communications, would tend to scare away capital from the country, make it more difficult for goods from the industrial areas to reach the seaports on schedule, and would in the long run be a heavy drain on the economic life of the country, thus compelling the voters of the country to reconsider their position.

Attacks on the economic life lines of the country were to be linked with sabotage on Government buildings and other symbols of apartheid. These attacks would serve as a source of inspiration to our people. In addition, they would provide an outlet for those people who were urging the adoption of violent methods and would enable us to give concrete proof to our followers that we had adopted a stronger line and were fighting back against Government violence.


The whole speech here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nelson_Mandela%27s_statement_from_the_dock_at_the_Rivonia_Trial

Mandela was an amazing man, but if it wasn't for guys like Joe Modise and Chris Hani, he wouldn't have ever gotten where he was, sad and depressing as that may be. He was much closer to Che Guevara than Mahatma Gandhi.

edit: What I mean by Mandela's non-violent protests is perhaps best captured here:


Meanwhile, the ANC didn't sit around idly waiting...

Toph Bei Fong fucked around with this message at 06:35 on May 2, 2015

ChairMaster
Aug 22, 2009

by R. Guyovich


Basebf555 posted:

Well I certainly agree that a threat of violence has a higher chance of being successful because fear is a great motivator. I just don't believe in that kind of success and I think change is worthless if violence is used to affect it.

The opinion of every stupid rear end in a top hat who's never had to face actual oppression in any real way, good for you. I'm sure that every black person in America can understand you saying that they should still be slaves because 600,000 people died in order for them to be free. Meanwhile here in the real world literally nothing will ever be done without the threat of violence when it comes to large social problems.

God, the more I think about what you just said the more I want to yell at you for being an empty-headed useless piece of phoney intellectual trash but I guess I should stop writing before the whole post just is me being mad.

freebooter
Jul 7, 2009

AUSTRALIA
NEEDS
TURNBULL


ChairMaster posted:

The opinion of every stupid rear end in a top hat who's never had to face actual oppression in any real way, good for you.

Yeah, this reminded me of a line from Ta-Nehisi Coates' great piece:

quote:

I grew up across the street from Mondawmin Mall, where today's riots began. My mother was raised in the same housing project, Gilmor Homes, where Freddie Gray was killed. Everyone I knew who lived in that world regarded the police not with admiration and respect but with fear and caution. People write these feelings off as wholly irrational at their own peril, or their own leisure.

Or, to put it another way: violence is already happening. It did not begin with the riots. Well worth reading the entire thing, and indeed everything Coates writes.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/nonviolence-as-compliance/391640/

Alec Bald Snatch
Sep 12, 2012

by exmarx


ChairMaster posted:

I'm sure that every black person in America can understand you saying that they should still be slaves because 600,000 people died in order for them to be free.

Hahaha. Most of them died because they were conscripted into a war they had no interest in fighting. There were riots over that poo poo too, y'know.

Orange Devil
Sep 30, 2010

CUNT


Basebf555 posted:

Yea its a good thing guys like MLK Jr., Gandi, and Mandela knew how to kick some rear end when necessary, otherwise they wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Gandhi actually endorsed violent resistance and considered resistance a moral imperative. He just thought non-violent resistance would be even more effective. So please don't use his name and legacy for liberal whitewash bullshit.

Basebf555 posted:

Well I certainly agree that a threat of violence has a higher chance of being successful because fear is a great motivator. I just don't believe in that kind of success and I think change is worthless if violence is used to affect it.

Violence ended feudalism, slavery and colonialism. Was all this change worthless?

Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 12:12 on May 2, 2015

ChairMaster
Aug 22, 2009

by R. Guyovich


comes along bort posted:

Hahaha. Most of them died because they were conscripted into a war they had no interest in fighting. There were riots over that poo poo too, y'know.

Obviously yea, that doesn't really change my argument though. I wasn't talking up the bravery and nobility of the soldiers of the civil war, I was talking about what a piece of poo poo that other poster is. The cause that those people died for doesn't change based on whether they wanted to or not.

freebooter
Jul 7, 2009

AUSTRALIA
NEEDS
TURNBULL


I just finished season 4 for the second time, and realised that it's not in fact Chris who kills Bodie, but some guy called O-Dog. Did anyone else think it was Chris?

forever whatever
Sep 28, 2007

Hitting the wall.


freebooter posted:

I just finished season 4 for the second time, and realised that it's not in fact Chris who kills Bodie, but some guy called O-Dog. Did anyone else think it was Chris?

Isn't it Micheal? I think you see his face.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Jeffrey of YOSPOS
Dec 22, 2005

GET LOSE, YOU CAN'T COMPARE WITH MY POWERS


forever whatever posted:

Isn't it Micheal? I think you see his face.

No, they specifically don't have Michael do it because he knows him and his first should be someone he doesn't know.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply