That’s a lot of people

Check out this time lapse video of the Millions March in New York City;  people marching against police violence in communities of color. That’s a whole lotta folks.



Related Articles

14 thoughts on “That’s a lot of people

  1. Sharpton leads to dissipate any meaningful revolutionary energy for his boss in the WH/DoJ, as McKibben has done with the environmental movement, but this smaller group kept their eyes on the prize, 4 and a half hours to mark 4 and a half minutes, shut down the Oakland Police Dept Monday.

    Knowing where it’s at, shutting down the machine is the only thing that’s bringing any change people. Unions, teachers, fast food workers, WLMrt workers, Amazon warehouses, the change is going to do you good.

    As was said, some intelligent and clever young adults.

  2. Too bad all that time and energy couldn’t be employed to address the greater problems facing the black community. Among those are single parent families, poor educational achievement, government dependency, lack of school choice, crime, drugs etc… you know, the destruction brought forth by progressivism.

    1. Obviously you missed the point @6:20 am, comments like yours, here again blaming the victims of centuries of institutional racism for creating the problems your statement shows you are completely aware of, proves the marchers are working in exactly the correct order to begin redress of those problems and grievances.

      Racists, misogynists, abusers and bigots have to admit to themselves that they are the what they are, and, then take responsibility for problems they created and sustain, before there will be any change. You consistently resemble that remark in every comment here.

      These marchers are gasping under YOUR repression, “I can’t breathe.” “I can’t breathe.”

    2. Denis,

      Do leaders in the African American community share your views? Who have you spoken to? Will you speaking to any African American community groups soon? I’d love to come and hear you.

    3. Denis, their biggest problem is with racists here, there, everywhere even in the red necked,Christian and conservative communities.

  3. I am not blaming the victim. I am blaming progressivism for the breakdown of the black family and other associated problem already listed. I am blaming the political philosophy that you endorse and the policies that spring from said philosophy. I can’t get ant clearer non. You and yours are the problem. I am oppressing nobody. I am working to free them from the plantation that is progressivism.

    1. So Denis, you disagree with Deuteronomy.

      And if thy brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing today.

      — Deuteronomy 15: 12–15

      And you disagree with John Locke:

      Besides the crime which consists in violating the law, and varying from the right rule of reason, whereby a man so far becomes degenerate, and declares himself to quit the principles of human nature, and to be a noxious creature, there is commonly injury done to some person or other, and some other man receives damage by his transgression: in which case he who hath received any damage, has, besides the right of punishment common to him with other men, a particular right to seek reparation.

      — John Locke, “Second Treatise”

      And you disagree with this:

      By our unpaid labor and suffering, we have earned the right to the soil, many times over and over, and now we are determined to have it.

      — Anonymous, 1861

      Make your case. Explain how they are all wrong, but you’re right.

  4. If blacks are enslaved in any way, it is by progressivism. I don’t imagine that you agree, but I think the progressives should let them free and pay reparations. Use your wallet, not mine.

      1. We’ll undoubtedly NOT be treated to a definition of, or maybe at least a partial comprehensible description of which facet of “progressivism,” that is the culprit responsible for this situation.

        That’ll happen about the same time that someone like this commentator organizes a million person march of citizens that hold his same views. (yes, one is a lonely number, else why would he keep coming back here?)

  5. Don’t have time for a full indictment of progressivism, but a good place to start your exploration would be modern day welfare which incentivized women to have children out of wedlock, while simultaneously encouraging irresponsibility for men.

    1. Read it here!

      Denis aka Jake, wingnut extraordinaire, now supports abortion on demand.

      Glad you’re finally coming down on the side of individual liberty!

      Do you now support marriage equality too?

    2. Denis,


      Nice to see you starting to hold Wall Street accountable, as they are the largest welfare queens.

      “Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval”

      To put $75 trillion in perspective, US GDP in 2012 was around $16.5 trillion. We blew a lot more than the $6 trillion they’re claiming in Iraq and Afghanistan. Social Security’s Trust Fund is around $2.3 trillion. Bank of America is just one Wall Street bank. They all have derivative exposure. I’ve seen estimates of $700 trillion, but I don’t think anyone knows.

      And thanks both parties, Wall Street just got more welfare:

      “Did Wall Street need to win the derivatives budget fight to hedge against oil plunge?”

      This interpretation may be too benign. As structured credit expert Tom Adams said via e-mail:

      Why are the proponents pushing so hard, with respect to the Dodd-Frank provision on derivatives pushed out of insured banks, to get this done now? Why not just wait until Republicans have control of the House and Senate? Why is Jamie Dimon calling on members now, rather than just waiting? The timing is weird.

      Perhaps there are political reasons that give various parties cover they want and that’s all there is to it.

      On the other hand, I’ve been closely watching the blow up in the oil and energy markets and I wonder if there may be a link to the Cromnibus fight.

      Much of the recent energy boom has been financed with junk debt and a good portion of that junk debt ended up in collateralized loan obligations. CLOs are also big users of credit default swaps, which was an important target of the Dodd Frank push-out. In addition, over the past 6 months banks were unable to unload a portion of the junk debt originated and so it remained on bank balance sheets. That debt is now substantially underwater. To hedge, banks are using CDS. Hedge funds are actively shorting these junk debt financed energy companies using CDS (it’s unclear where the long side of those CDS have ended up – probably bank balance sheets and CLOs).

      Finally, junk financed energy companies have been trying to offset the falling price of oil by hedging via energy derivatives. As it turns out, energy derivatives are also part of the DF push-out battle.

      Conditions in the junk and energy markets are pretty dire right now as a result of the collapse in oil, as you know. I suspect there are some very anxious bank executives looking at their balance sheets right now.

      Since the derivatives push-out rule of Dodd Frank was scheduled to go into affect in 2015, the potential change in managing their exposure may be causing a lot of volatility for banks now – they need to hedge in large numbers at the best rates possible. Is it possible that bank concerns (especially Citi and JP Morgan) about the potential energy-related losses are why Dodd Frank has to be changed now?

Comments are closed.