What I said would be true of Russia. This is because Russia is an oligarchy and this is how oligarchies operate.
The United States is an oligarchy as well.
Therefore what I said applies to the United States.
The goal of law enforcement is to preserve the existing social structure. American social structure is that of oligarchy. Therefore law enforcement exists to preserve oligarchy.
American law enforcement is immensely well funded. These protests did not all encounter law enforcement opposition. Therefore, law enforcement must have determined that these protests did not represent a threat to oligarchy. Therefore the protests were toothless because they did not represent a threat to the existing social structure
What I said would be true of Russia. This is because Russia is an oligarchy and this is how oligarchies operate.
The United States is an oligarchy as well.
Therefore what I said applies to the United States.
The goal of law enforcement is to preserve the existing social structure. American social structure is that of oligarchy. Therefore law enforcement exists to preserve oligarchy.
American law enforcement is immensely well funded. These protests did not all encounter law enforcement opposition. Therefore, law enforcement must have determined that these protests did not represent a threat to oligarchy. Therefore the protests were toothless because they did not represent a threat to the existing social structure
Ah, now I understand your “logic”. I didn’t pay attention to the instance you are from at first.
Isn’t this just admission to stereotyping which is inherently illogical?
The US is an oligarchy. Any actual threat to that would be suppressed. Because these protests were not suppressed, what conclusion can be drawn?