
Portland police declare riot as anti-cop protesters torch union headquarters - Bostonian
https://nypost.com/2020/07/19/portland-police-declare-riot-as-anti-cop-protesters-torch-union-building/
======
braindongle
As a liberal/progressive/democrat in today's society, you're pro-labor,
therefore pro-union, right? When do you make an exception?

I see a parallel with our healthcare system. Undoubtedly, though things are
bad and getting worse, capitalism kinda' works. But in the U.S., healthcare is
a failed market and that's not going to change. Time to start over. Same with
police unions.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
In my view unions make most sense as a collective organization representing
labor in negotiations against the collective organization of a corporation
representing capital.

I'm not convinced yes that unions make sense when the other party represents
the interests of the people - ie the government. As a similar example, I don't
want our military to have a union - it seems like that would be overall
detrimental as well.

~~~
dependenttypes
The government might claim that it represents the interests of the people but
they do not seem to put their words into actions. Would you support teachers
employed by the state not having unions?

------
Bostonian
This post, which has a title that could be construed as critical of the
protesters, has been flagged. You can search "portland" by date at HN and find
many other stories about the unrest which have not been flagged. Articles are
being flagged based on politics.

~~~
christefano
Not just the title. The article is heavily biased. Framing protestors as
“vigilantes” implies wrongdoing, and using words like “protestors facing off
with police” with no other context implies that protestors and police are
equal or comparable in force. It’s not even close.

~~~
CompanionCubee
> Framing protestors as “vigilantes” implies wrongdoing

Wouldn't want to imply wrongdoing on the part of arsonists, after all.

