|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 04 2020 20:31 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 20:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 16:14 ChristianS wrote:
And if the problem really is mere ignorance, how are these people still sufficiently aware to have visceral partisan reactions directly opposing reforming this injustice? Slogans like “stop and frisk,” “blue lives matter,” “boycott the NFL” each in their own way indicate an awareness of, and explicit support for, the exact systems we’re pretending they’re merely ignorant of.
So before you accuse me of ill will or lack of empathy or something again, why don’t you try to describe why you think these people tolerate this injustice and react against calls to reform it (since I apparently lack the empathy and good will to intuit their motivations on my own)? "Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election. "Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption. "Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does. Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change. A charity that helps poor immigrants won't tell charities that help poor American's that those charities are bigots and should instead join their cause, because helping poor immigrants will by extension help poor Americans. I don't think think the issue of Police corruption and police brutality should be compartmentalized by race. When talking about the rights of individuals, I don't believe there is any merit in bringing race up. I don't see why me saying "All lives matter" rather than "black lives matter" is bad. Both say black lives matter, but one includes non-blacks as well who are suffering. I mean, just look at how 'all lives matter' arose. It was a reaction AGAINST BLM. The phrase has much more meaning in context than simply 'all lives matter'. It basically says black lives don't matter - it is a call to arms for the status quo and an admonishment to those who would continually insist that black lives do matter. All Lives Matter is a quintessential example of reactionary politics, it's startling how neatly it fits the mold.
Yes, and its surprising to me how otherwise smart, well intentioned people go along with it without thinking.
|
On June 04 2020 19:54 GreenHorizons wrote:The thing that bothers me the most about these arguments in support of white supremacy is that they hide behind calls for equality that are blatantly hollow. If people support white supremacy, say it wit ya chest imo. Show nested quote +...for whatever reason is refusing to accept that Black Lives Matter also means justice for all people... Same goes for people calling this stuff out imo. Call it what it is. White supremacist propaganda meant to undermine equitable treatment under the law masquerading as sensible calls for equity.
I couldn't agree more. The face of white supremacy today consists in saying there is no institutional / systemic racism in the US today and and so there is nothing to fix. Which is a nice way to keep black people oppressed with a seemingly not racist or even equalitarian message.
"All life matter" is a disgusting slogan because contrarily to black lives, no one ever claimed or pretended that white lives didn't matter. And a cop killing a "respectable", white person would go to jail like everyone else.
|
On June 04 2020 20:11 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 16:14 ChristianS wrote:
And if the problem really is mere ignorance, how are these people still sufficiently aware to have visceral partisan reactions directly opposing reforming this injustice? Slogans like “stop and frisk,” “blue lives matter,” “boycott the NFL” each in their own way indicate an awareness of, and explicit support for, the exact systems we’re pretending they’re merely ignorant of.
So before you accuse me of ill will or lack of empathy or something again, why don’t you try to describe why you think these people tolerate this injustice and react against calls to reform it (since I apparently lack the empathy and good will to intuit their motivations on my own)? "Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election. "Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption. "Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does. Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change. A charity that helps poor immigrants won't tell charities that help poor American's that those charities are bigots and should instead join their cause, because helping poor immigrants will by extension help poor Americans. I don't think think the issue of Police corruption and police brutality should be compartmentalized by race. When talking about the rights of individuals, I don't believe there is any merit in bringing race up. I don't see why me saying "All lives matter" rather than "black lives matter" is bad. Both say black lives matter, but one includes non-blacks as well who are suffering. I mean, just look at how 'all lives matter' arose. It was a reaction AGAINST BLM. The phrase has much more meaning in context than simply 'all lives matter'. It basically says black lives don't matter - it is a call to arms for the status quo and an admonishment to those who would continually insist that black lives do matter.
Exactly. Putting ALM and Blue Lives Matter in context as targeted responses to Black Lives Matter takes away all the plausible deniability for me. Let's ask Hypothetical Jimmy how one of his conversations went to illustrate this:
Hypothetical Jimmy: I saw a black man have his home broken into by police, and they assaulted and pepper sprayed him. I don't think that's right. Black lives matter.
Hypothetical Richard: ALL lives matter, Jimmy. Don't you think the police have a hard time with assault as well?
Hypothetical Jimmy: but that's not what happened. Police attacked a black person who was minding their own business. Didn't they have a job to do?
Hypothetical Richard: blue lives matter too, Jimmy.
You'll notice, in this simple example, the invocation of "All Lives Matter" and "Blue Lives Matter" are not actually made as calls for justice and equality. In a conversation about violence against black people, they're used to shut them up about it. Black people dominate the conversation about police brutality because they experience it the most.
Oy. I had to spell that out. That felt weird.
The focus needs to be on how black people aren't fairly treated. Whether they're on the street walking, or driving, or even just at home, police have duly demonstrated they have no problem invading their personal space and assaulting/arresting/killing them, and claiming they feared for their life after. Responding to that by saying "All Lives Matter" is trying to take the focus away from a real issue, by pretending to care about it at the same time. Blue Lives Matter is just a perverse co-opting of a concept people badly need to understand.
|
On June 04 2020 20:40 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 20:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 16:14 ChristianS wrote:
And if the problem really is mere ignorance, how are these people still sufficiently aware to have visceral partisan reactions directly opposing reforming this injustice? Slogans like “stop and frisk,” “blue lives matter,” “boycott the NFL” each in their own way indicate an awareness of, and explicit support for, the exact systems we’re pretending they’re merely ignorant of.
So before you accuse me of ill will or lack of empathy or something again, why don’t you try to describe why you think these people tolerate this injustice and react against calls to reform it (since I apparently lack the empathy and good will to intuit their motivations on my own)? "Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election. "Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption. "Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does. Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change. A charity that helps poor immigrants won't tell charities that help poor American's that those charities are bigots and should instead join their cause, because helping poor immigrants will by extension help poor Americans. I don't think think the issue of Police corruption and police brutality should be compartmentalized by race. When talking about the rights of individuals, I don't believe there is any merit in bringing race up. I don't see why me saying "All lives matter" rather than "black lives matter" is bad. Both say black lives matter, but one includes non-blacks as well who are suffering. I mean, just look at how 'all lives matter' arose. It was a reaction AGAINST BLM. The phrase has much more meaning in context than simply 'all lives matter'. It basically says black lives don't matter - it is a call to arms for the status quo and an admonishment to those who would continually insist that black lives do matter. Exactly. Putting ALM and Blue Lives Matter in context as targeted responses to Black Lives Matter takes away all the plausible deniability for me. Let's ask Hypothetical Jimmy how one of his conversations went to illustrate this: Hypothetical Jimmy: I saw a black man have his home broken into by police, and they assaulted and pepper sprayed him. I don't think that's right. Black lives matter. Hypothetical Richard: ALL lives matter, Jimmy. Don't you think the police have a hard time with assault as well? Hypothetical Jimmy: but that's not what happened. Police attacked a black person who was minding their own business. Didn't they have a job to do? Hypothetical Richard: blue lives matter too, Jimmy. You'll notice, in this simple example, the invocation of "All Lives Matter" and "Blue Lives Matter" are not actually made as calls for justice and equality. In a conversation about violence against black people, they're used to shut them up about it. Black people dominate the conversation about police brutality because they experience it the most.Oy. I had to spell that out. That felt weird. The focus needs to be on how black people aren't fairly treated. Whether they're on the street walking, or driving, or even just at home, police have duly demonstrated they have no problem invading their personal space and assaulting/arresting/killing them, and claiming they feared for their life after. Responding to that by saying "All Lives Matter" is trying to take the focus away from a real issue, by pretending to care about it at the same time. Blue Lives Matter is just a perverse co-opting of a concept people badly need to understand.
Very nicely explained.
I find this disconnect so weird here. I absolutely think that the goal is a society which doesn't see race, a society where it simply doesn't matter what colour your skin has, and thus one that doesn't need specific actions for different people. I don't think there are a lot of people who argue for a society which favors black people.
But that is not the situation we are currently in. We are in a situation which very clearly disadvantages anyone but white people. Calls of Black Lives Matter just want the same status as white people. But they don't currently have that equality, while white people do have it. It is a clear logical fallacy to assume that to reach an egalitarian society, you need equal actions for everyone. If the society is currently not egalitarian, then you need more action in some areas, while you don't need as much action in others.
There are two interlinked topics within this problem. Police brutality and racism. Police brutality is a general problem, and needs to be adressed in general. But police brutality is a bigger problem for black people, because they suffer more of it due to racism. Thus, in addition to the general stuff that needs to be done about police brutality, additional stuff needs to be done against police brutality against black people. Furthermore, racism in general is something that needs to be addressed, too. Because it is not JUST police brutality where racism comes into play.
|
On June 04 2020 20:40 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 20:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 16:14 ChristianS wrote:
And if the problem really is mere ignorance, how are these people still sufficiently aware to have visceral partisan reactions directly opposing reforming this injustice? Slogans like “stop and frisk,” “blue lives matter,” “boycott the NFL” each in their own way indicate an awareness of, and explicit support for, the exact systems we’re pretending they’re merely ignorant of.
So before you accuse me of ill will or lack of empathy or something again, why don’t you try to describe why you think these people tolerate this injustice and react against calls to reform it (since I apparently lack the empathy and good will to intuit their motivations on my own)? "Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election. "Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption. "Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does. Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change. A charity that helps poor immigrants won't tell charities that help poor American's that those charities are bigots and should instead join their cause, because helping poor immigrants will by extension help poor Americans. I don't think think the issue of Police corruption and police brutality should be compartmentalized by race. When talking about the rights of individuals, I don't believe there is any merit in bringing race up. I don't see why me saying "All lives matter" rather than "black lives matter" is bad. Both say black lives matter, but one includes non-blacks as well who are suffering. I mean, just look at how 'all lives matter' arose. It was a reaction AGAINST BLM. The phrase has much more meaning in context than simply 'all lives matter'. It basically says black lives don't matter - it is a call to arms for the status quo and an admonishment to those who would continually insist that black lives do matter. Exactly. Putting ALM and Blue Lives Matter in context as targeted responses to Black Lives Matter takes away all the plausible deniability for me. Let's ask Hypothetical Jimmy how one of his conversations went to illustrate this: Hypothetical Jimmy: I saw a black man have his home broken into by police, and they assaulted and pepper sprayed him. I don't think that's right. Black lives matter. Hypothetical Richard: ALL lives matter, Jimmy. Don't you think the police have a hard time with assault as well? Hypothetical Jimmy: but that's not what happened. Police attacked a black person who was minding their own business. Didn't they have a job to do? Hypothetical Richard: blue lives matter too, Jimmy. You'll notice, in this simple example, the invocation of "All Lives Matter" and "Blue Lives Matter" are not actually made as calls for justice and equality. In a conversation about violence against black people, they're used to shut them up about it. Black people dominate the conversation about police brutality because they experience it the most.Oy. I had to spell that out. That felt weird. The focus needs to be on how black people aren't fairly treated. Whether they're on the street walking, or driving, or even just at home, police have duly demonstrated they have no problem invading their personal space and assaulting/arresting/killing them, and claiming they feared for their life after. Responding to that by saying "All Lives Matter" is trying to take the focus away from a real issue, by pretending to care about it at the same time. Blue Lives Matter is just a perverse co-opting of a concept people badly need to understand.
So Much this. There is an absurd lack of effort on the part of many people to understand the fact that BLM is a call to action and a reminder to those that have forgotten or chosen to ignore the fact that they do in fact matter. Watch the video of George Floyd and tell me that those cops thought his life mattered. I just saw someone who i highly respect for her support of immigrants rights and volunteer work with people from all walks of life post ALM and Blue LM on FB. Why? because her son is a cop, and she hasn't bothered to really understand what it all means.
FWIW @Berserk I'd hazard a guess that any action against a police officer is treated 10x more harshly in every state and jurisdiction, so I dont think that really needs to be said with any slogan. the purpose of Blue LM is an indication of support for the law enforcement officers that is almost exclusively used in one of three ways:
1) a cop has died
2) when they have gone too far and threats of retaliation or policy demands from the public or political sphere makes them feel that they will lose the freedom to defend themselves in the line of duty.
3) in direct opposition to BLM (see #2)
And that is not to say that you cant support the police AND support BLM, but I believe that supporting Blue LM and BLM is not possible.
|
There are two interlinked topics within this problem. Police brutality and racism. Police brutality is a general problem, and needs to be adressed in general. But police brutality is a bigger problem for black people, because they suffer more of it due to racism. Thus, in addition to the general stuff that needs to be done about police brutality, additional stuff needs to be done against police brutality against black people. Furthermore, racism in general is something that needs to be addressed, too. Because it is not JUST police brutality where racism comes into play.
There are tenured professors around this country that can't/won't synthesize this, some teaching subjects like sociology. So people manage to get the social signifiers of competence (a relevant degree) without even this elegantly simple understanding. Instead, they are indoctrinated with centuries of propaganda reinforcing the roots of white supremacy in this country that forced folks like me to plead in places like this until people like you say what you're saying now (I don't think this is particularly recent for you).
The next question we're struggling with as a society is what to do with people that demonstrate no desire or willingness to mature in that way?
EDIT: Just to pitch a wild idea, I think police should have to take a AlAnon type personal moral inventory (with the assistance of case logs) and admit to themselves, their god, and others the exact nature of their wrongs. I'd even consider giving them limited immunity in exchange for never working as police again and informing on coworkers not taking ownership of their past wrongs.
|
It's so weird seeing discussions about slogans/hashtags and their interpretations (which apparently are still different for each person) having such a high value and such agressive responses. I could be so simple:
- A black man got killed again. We need to change something. I think black lives matter.
- I think so too, just don't forget that this is not only an issue for black people and try to go for a solution that helps all people who are getting treated badly by the police.
- Yeah cool. Lets go.
All lifes matter without it's attempted framing/meaning by certain groups is factually the best way to look at the issue, isn't it? So maybe it would be clever to just use both hashtags instead of antagonizing and attacking everyone who possibly means well, but doesn't know or doesn't care that right-wing-groups are using it as an argument not to do anything. If All lifes matter would be connected to a call to action equal to black lives matter, couldn't it be more inclusive and powerful?
Afterall, it's just a slogan/hashtag and people define it's meaning.
|
All lifes matter without it's attempted framing/meaning by certain groups is factually the best way to look at the issue, isn't it? ...
So maybe it would be clever to just use both hashtags instead of antagonizing and attacking everyone who possibly means well, but doesn't know or doesn't care that right-wing-groups are using it as an argument not to do anything...
etc...
I'm not supposed to pat you guys on the back I think, but I do appreciate it. I just want to mention that you all should revisit your thoughts on abrasiveness after you've heard this for the 10,000th time and optimistically walked someone through it for the 1000th.
EDIT: That sounds harsher than I meant it I think. I've noticed some have already. Just in the middle of a bunch of research and you read these arguments and check the date and it's just infuriating we've been doing this dance for decades and sometimes centuries.
|
I can wholeheartedly understand why people can say All Lives Matter without actively thinking they are white supremacists. You can't really identify as such when you don't actively pursue this concept, if you understand what I'm trying to say. And when you tell them they actually are white supremacists because this and that you put them in a defensive position because white supremacy has such a derogatory connotation.
There's alot of psychology going on when polarizing issues hit 'neutral' folk. (Aggressively) telling them they're not helping your cause even though they think they're at the very least not hurting your cause might send them to the opposite direction of your camp.
I cant really put it succinctly here because I'm at work and need to start again lol.
|
On June 04 2020 21:24 GreenHorizons wrote:
There are tenured professors around this country that can't/won't synthesize this, some teaching subjects like sociology. So people manage to get the social signifiers of competence (a relevant degree) without even this elegantly simple understanding. Instead, they are indoctrinated with centuries of propaganda reinforcing the roots of white supremacy in this country that forced folks like me to plead in places like this until people like you say what you're saying now (I don't think this is particularly recent for you).
I am not sure that telling people how "people like you" will guide "people like them" to the light until they say the right, "elegantly simple" thing is the best way to go if you want to be listened to. If that's really what you think, you at least could avoid saying it openly.
I think most folks in the West are aware of institutionalized and systemic racism in the US.
|
On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 16:14 ChristianS wrote:
And if the problem really is mere ignorance, how are these people still sufficiently aware to have visceral partisan reactions directly opposing reforming this injustice? Slogans like “stop and frisk,” “blue lives matter,” “boycott the NFL” each in their own way indicate an awareness of, and explicit support for, the exact systems we’re pretending they’re merely ignorant of.
So before you accuse me of ill will or lack of empathy or something again, why don’t you try to describe why you think these people tolerate this injustice and react against calls to reform it (since I apparently lack the empathy and good will to intuit their motivations on my own)? "Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election. "Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption. "Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does. Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change.
Like.... every charity I've ever heard of DOES seek for some policy change. Doesn't mean they're malicious
|
On June 04 2020 20:32 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 20:31 farvacola wrote:On June 04 2020 20:11 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:50 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 19:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On June 04 2020 19:20 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 18:52 Sr18 wrote:On June 04 2020 18:09 BerserkSword wrote:On June 04 2020 17:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 04 2020 17:10 BerserkSword wrote:
[quote]
"Stop and frisk" is a slogan? Where? Last I remember, the biggest champion of stop and frisk in the 21st century America just got blown out of the water in an election.
"Blue lives matter" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. It's nothing more than a slogan that implicates cop lives matter and I guess that killing a cop should be considered a hate crime. Any assumption one makes about it supporting police brutality is....nothing more than than that - an assumption.
"Boycott the NFL" does not indicate an explicit support for police brutality. You can boycott the NFL and still be against police brutality. I don't know if you realize, but disrespecting the flag is unpalatable to MANY Americans, and in their eyes, the flag does not represent police brutality. Sorry that not everyone feels the same way about the American flag the way Kap does.
Personally, I think ignorance of the general electorate is a huge problem, and not in just this issue and not just within certain demographics. Going back to stop and risk and bloomberg - Bloomberg was able to win in NYC, a city in which more than half the population is either Black or Hispanic, an unprecedented THREE TIMES. Let that sink in. There is a general ignorance and dissonance when it comes to the American electorate. Quite hard to know if you are serious. All lives matter or Blue lives matter implies there is no discrimination against black folks and that it's not a racial problem. Cops are not the ones that need to be defended here. The flag represents the country. The country is not giving many of its citizens the most basic rights: equal treatment, dignity, justice. Its own officers, the police, are humiliating, beating, killing black people and don't even get prosecuted for it. I get it, you guys care more about your misplaced patriotism and the well being of businesses than the most elementary rights of people with a browner skin than you. But don't be such a hypocrite and admit that boycott the NFL, Blue lives matter and so on are just a fuck you to BLM and people who fight for this charade to end. All lives matter and blue lives matter do not imply that there is no discrimination against black people. Thinking that they do is just mental gymnastics. There are many ways to look at a flag. The Constitution doesnt sanction any discriminatory PD practices, and the Constitution is the law of the country represented by the flag. No matter what way you want to spin it, someone boycotting the NFL because he/she doesn't view the flag the same way Kap does NOT necessarily make him against police brutality. I don't know what you mean by "you guys" since libertarians place liberty for all above everything. Sorry it doesnt fit in with your narrative, the same narrative that will drive most of the African Americans in this country to vote for the white politician trying to hand out black cards. Personally, I am an All Lives Matter guy and don't believe in any movement that places one race above the rest like BLM. As a brown man, I don't want to pretend that police brutality is a black ONLY problem and I don't want other groups to be marginalized. The idea of working only for the betterment of black people, and that it will somehow spill over to everyone, is flawed and baseless. I care for defending the rights of ALL, and that includes the rights of individuals to their property. I don't believe innocent people should have their rights violated just because another person/group has had theirs violated by a completely different party. I will never be for tolerating the violation of rights against innocent people, not even as an outlet for frustration. I assume BLM doesn't presume to place black lives above white lives, but rather the goal is to have black lives mean just as much as white lives. It is entirely possible to focus on stopping excessive police violence against black people without condoning the same violence against whites. I'd think very few BLM protesters are okay with excessive police violence against white people, it's just not the focus right now. First of all, I don't know why this has to be a white vs black thing. There are other groups in the country and nobody is spared from the problem. Second of all -You're correct - BLM doesn't say black lives are above white lives. Here is what they do believe, though: "We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people." https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/They are putting blacks above others in the discussion of police brutality. I do not believe in their philosophy. I do not believe that fighting only for black people by extension helps all people. This is the same group that bullied Bernie Sanders, we are talking a man who protested on the streets for black people when things were very bad for them, for saying "all lives matter." I do not believe in aggressively ignoring everyone else under the assumption that "things will simply just get better for them too." It leads to marginalization. For example, you will NEVER hear about police brutality against Native Americans, who suffer from police brutality at a rate higher than every single other race in the country, including blacks. https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/us/native-lives-matter/index.htmlThe idea that working ONLY for justice for black people leads to justice for everyone is a baseless assumption. As for "it's not the focus right now" - I don't agree. Injustice against everyone should be the focus at all times. This makes little sense to me. Its like attacking a charity set up to help poor immigrants for not also helping poor Americans. Some things are better compartmentalised, when a problem has different qualities or outcomes for different groups of people. I'm sure there are movements or causes which are focusing on general police brutality, but the one that captured the imagination was BLM because justice system outcomes are so much worse for black people. BLM is not like a charity. Charities don't seek to exert political influence and policy change. A charity that helps poor immigrants won't tell charities that help poor American's that those charities are bigots and should instead join their cause, because helping poor immigrants will by extension help poor Americans. I don't think think the issue of Police corruption and police brutality should be compartmentalized by race. When talking about the rights of individuals, I don't believe there is any merit in bringing race up. I don't see why me saying "All lives matter" rather than "black lives matter" is bad. Both say black lives matter, but one includes non-blacks as well who are suffering. I mean, just look at how 'all lives matter' arose. It was a reaction AGAINST BLM. The phrase has much more meaning in context than simply 'all lives matter'. It basically says black lives don't matter - it is a call to arms for the status quo and an admonishment to those who would continually insist that black lives do matter. All Lives Matter is a quintessential example of reactionary politics, it's startling how neatly it fits the mold. Yes, and its surprising to me how otherwise smart, well intentioned people go along with it without thinking.
The best comparison I've seen someone else make: no one seemed to feel the need to defend other forests when people say "save the rainforest"
|
On June 04 2020 22:35 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 21:24 GreenHorizons wrote:
There are tenured professors around this country that can't/won't synthesize this, some teaching subjects like sociology. So people manage to get the social signifiers of competence (a relevant degree) without even this elegantly simple understanding. Instead, they are indoctrinated with centuries of propaganda reinforcing the roots of white supremacy in this country that forced folks like me to plead in places like this until people like you say what you're saying now (I don't think this is particularly recent for you).
I am not sure that telling people how "people like you" will guide "people like them" to the light until they say the right, "elegantly simple" thing is the best way to go if you want to be listened to. If that's really what you think, you at least could avoid saying it openly. I think most folks in the West are aware of institutionalized and systemic racism in the US.
In the West, yes, in AMERICA? That's a much harder call to make. A lot of people don't really seem to believe it. See BerserkSword's spirited defense of a slogan that's specifically designed to repudiate the idea that black Americans are treated worse than white ones.
There's a lot of people who clearly think that Black Americans are lazy/welfare abusers/gang bangers who deserve it and are solely responsible for their issue/should just work harder.
If everyone believed it there wouldn't be this constant absurd pushback against every movement designed to raise awareness about racism against black people.
|
On June 04 2020 22:35 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2020 21:24 GreenHorizons wrote:
There are tenured professors around this country that can't/won't synthesize this, some teaching subjects like sociology. So people manage to get the social signifiers of competence (a relevant degree) without even this elegantly simple understanding. Instead, they are indoctrinated with centuries of propaganda reinforcing the roots of white supremacy in this country that forced folks like me to plead in places like this until people like you say what you're saying now (I don't think this is particularly recent for you).
I am not sure that telling people how "people like you" will guide "people like them" to the light until they say the right, "elegantly simple" thing is the best way to go if you want to be listened to. If that's really what you think, you at least could avoid saying it openly. I think most folks in the West are aware of institutionalized and systemic racism in the US.
This is where the Baldwin "moral monsters" Kwame Ture ..."the US has none (conscience)" comes from. Mentioned here
and the fury at knowing people have lived and died lives longer and harder than mine explaining this to no avail. In no small part because of precisely what you point out. The people of the West ARE AWARE. This is the frustration at things like the kneeling in the NFL from my perspective.
Who's attention are you drawing to what? They know, they don't care enough to change it but will let the state teargas you, beat you bloody, and ultimately murder you to keep the status quo and have the caucacisty to say things like "I don't see how not being nice to me about it helps you hmMm???"
|
On June 04 2020 22:25 Uldridge wrote:
I can wholeheartedly understand why people can say All Lives Matter without actively thinking they are white supremacists. You can't really identify as such when you don't actively pursue this concept, if you understand what I'm trying to say. And when you tell them they actually are white supremacists because this and that you put them in a defensive position because white supremacy has such a derogatory connotation.
There's alot of psychology going on when polarizing issues hit 'neutral' folk. (Aggressively) telling them they're not helping your cause even though they think they're at the very least not hurting your cause might send them to the opposite direction of your camp.
I cant really put it succinctly here because I'm at work and need to start again lol.
I know exactly what you mean because i was always on the side of the neutral folk until some point in the last few years.
Its a really hard thing to accept that when all you do is pursue security for your family and you aren't involved in political stuff at all that you can be actively hurting a group of people by simply declining to take up their cause.
I sympathize alot with that point of view, but it is sadly wrong, and there is a state of affairs right now where doing nothing is harmful and failing to take up the cause of fighting for the rights of black people is not that different from the people who actively fight against the rights of black people.
That's why doing nothing about these problems is the right wing solution, because doing nothing is something that most people can accept.
|
Agreeing with the above sentiments that a lot of the people (at least that I come across) who see "all lives matter" as the inclusive way to say that they do have a problem with police brutality in general, yet may not really see/agree with the point of dis-proportionality in treatment, which goes beyond policing on the ground. Whether that be due to true racism deep down or just not getting the concept, there are a whole lot of them.
Just an anecdote from work yesterday, so I'll spoiler it.
+ Show Spoiler +This is in Oklahoma. Making friendly small-talk in the morning with another stockroom associate, asked her about her day etc. Told her I'd been sorta glued to protest streams and it's a very interesting time, in my opinion. She responded by saying that she cannot stand BLM, that all lives matter and that everyone should be treated with fairness; people need to stop dividing it more. She's a white single mother and is not the only person in my store who echoes the exact same feeling: "BLM appears divisive, why is it so controversial to unite?"
Only saying this because I don't know if there are genuinely racist feelings below each person's opinion on the mattter; some people just miss the point and sort of get stuck in the weeds once they find a comfy thought to cling to.
And for what it's worth, I was at one point closer to that camp than I am now. Mostly because I didn't really care about the issues at hand, and because my several law-enforcement encounters never ended with me feeling protected or served (mostly out of the delusion that I should be given better treatment whilst actively breaking the law.)
|
On June 04 2020 23:00 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Agreeing with the above sentiments that a lot of the people (at least that I come across) who see "all lives matter" as the inclusive way to say that they do have a problem with police brutality in general, yet may not really see/agree with the point of dis-proportionality in treatment, which goes beyond policing on the ground. Whether that be due to true racism deep down or just not getting the concept, there are a whole lot of them. Just an anecdote from work yesterday, so I'll spoiler it. + Show Spoiler +This is in Oklahoma. Making friendly small-talk in the morning with another stockroom associate, asked her about her day etc. Told her I'd been sorta glued to protest streams and it's a very interesting time, in my opinion. She responded by saying that she cannot stand BLM, that all lives matter and that everyone should be treated with fairness; people need to stop dividing it more. She's a white single mother and is not the only person in my store who echoes the exact same feeling: "BLM appears divisive, why is it so controversial to unite?"
Only saying this because I don't know if there are genuinely racist feelings below each person's opinion on the mattter; some people just miss the point and sort of get stuck in the weeds once they find a comfy thought to cling to. And for what it's worth, I was at one point closer to that camp than I am now. Mostly because I didn't really care about the issues at hand, and because my several law-enforcement encounters never ended with me feeling protected or served (mostly out of the delusion that I should be given better treatment whilst actively breaking the law.)
All lives can't matter because black lives don't matter still. You can't say all lives matter until black lives matter.
People will say black lives matter and ignore the countless evidence that that isn't the case in regards to police brutality and the justice system, which was the starting point for the incarnation we have today.
|
On June 04 2020 23:00 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Agreeing with the above sentiments that a lot of the people (at least that I come across) who see "all lives matter" as the inclusive way to say that they do have a problem with police brutality in general, yet may not really see/agree with the point of dis-proportionality in treatment, which goes beyond policing on the ground. Whether that be due to true racism deep down or just not getting the concept, there are a whole lot of them. Just an anecdote from work yesterday, so I'll spoiler it. + Show Spoiler +This is in Oklahoma. Making friendly small-talk in the morning with another stockroom associate, asked her about her day etc. Told her I'd been sorta glued to protest streams and it's a very interesting time, in my opinion. She responded by saying that she cannot stand BLM, that all lives matter and that everyone should be treated with fairness; people need to stop dividing it more. She's a white single mother and is not the only person in my store who echoes the exact same feeling: "BLM appears divisive, why is it so controversial to unite?"
Only saying this because I don't know if there are genuinely racist feelings below each person's opinion on the mattter; some people just miss the point and sort of get stuck in the weeds once they find a comfy thought to cling to. And for what it's worth, I was at one point closer to that camp than I am now. Mostly because I didn't really care about the issues at hand, and because my several law-enforcement encounters never ended with me feeling protected or served (mostly out of the delusion that I should be given better treatment whilst actively breaking the law.)
Ideally we could get past this so we could attack the root issues of capitalism that necessitates a society where that stockroom clerk in OK, the cashier that called the police on George Floyd, the coal miner fighting for healthcare, and the people in the streets see themselves as enemies or of disparate interests. Instead see our common class interests as inextricably tied to racial justice. That there is no peace without justice.
Instead we have to explain why kneeling during the anthem at a football game isn't bad (EDIT) and saying "All Lives Matter" is actually.
|
|
|
If anything with the current climate this might help Biden.
Cops are absolutely toxic right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
