The Problem with Black Lives Matter

More
6 years 8 months ago #286686 by Carlos.Martinez3
Some action bring drama as does some ideas. Intentions are obvious some days. To me ... It seems this line and these lines are drawing people away from peace and moren to a type of personal segregation. Be cautious Jedi where you put your mind and heart because that which you think... You are . That which you store you will find.
Every life matters . Not just one. Many can share the same value. Personally ... Personally I don't subscribe to this idea that one matters over the other. Cops and people matter. May the Force y'all seek find y'all where y'all seek it !

Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
pastor@templeofthejediorder.org
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago #286687 by Rosalyn J
Yes, I am suggesting that the characterization of BLM as violent is due to our proclivity to document violence, activating language.

I haven't said anything about the characterization of BLM as racist, but I will now.

It feels, to me as a Black person, that when the argument Black Lives Matter is countered with All Lives Matter, it belittles my experience and my struggle. Society can SAY All Lives Matter, but what is put put in place? What do the systems say. BLM is the consequence of years of trying to come to the table, years of trying to get our voice heard and years of not being listened to.

So now our furry can be dismissed because we are not inclusive enough? We are not calm enough?

Pax Per Ministerium
[img



The following user(s) said Thank You: Nakis, Kobos, Brick

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago #286690 by Brick

steamboat28 wrote:

Brick wrote: But I would say that the main thing wrong with 'Black Lives Matter' is that it's only half a sentence, it's missing 'too', or 'just as much as white lives' from the end of it.


If "all lives mattered," people wouldn't have to specify that black lives do. Your comment is well-meaning in spirit (I hope), but displays a very dangerous misunderstanding of the situation at hand.


I think you misunderstand the point I'm trying to convey Steam. The fact of the matter is that all lives do matter. But I understand that all lives are not currently treated equally, which is why I said that I understand why the movement exists. The problem with the title 'black lives matter' is that it can be warped by idiots or enemies of the movement to be interpreted as implying that other lives don't, which is not the argument that I believe they are trying to put forward and which leaves it open to being hijacked by bigots and morons (which is what happened to feminism for a time).

I was under the impression that the point of BLM was to remind everyone that 'Black Lives Matter Too' ie, just as much as a the lives of white people, so why is it that when a black person is shot by a cop, or murdered, or mugged etc etc noone bats an eye-lid and yet when the same thing happens to a white person everyone loses their mind? I thought BLM was supposed to highlight the double standard and demand equality (hence my comparison to feminism)?

My complaint was that the movement has, to a degree, been Hijacked (much like feminism was in the past), so now when a BLM march happens over a particular event, and someone stands up and says, 'yes, you're right. This is wrong. All lives matter equally and should be treated equally' they get berated by a mob of bigots that are somehow offended by that statement, rather than a bunch of people saying 'yes, thank you, this is exactly what we've been trying to point out'.

Apprentice to Maitre Chevalier Jedi Alexandre Orion

Moderator | Welcome Team | IP Team

IP Journal | IP Journal 2 | AP Journal | Open Journal

'The only contest any of us should be engaged in is with ourselves, to be better than yesterday'

- Knight Senan
The following user(s) said Thank You: Zenchi, Kobos, Rex

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago #286693 by Brick

Rosalyn J wrote: It feels, to me as a Black person, that when the argument Black Lives Matter is countered with All Lives Matter, it belittles my experience and my struggle. Society can SAY All Lives Matter, but what is put in place? What do the systems say. BLM is the consequence of years of trying to come to the table, years of trying to get our voice heard and years of not being listened to.


Yes, I agree with this completely Ros. For clarity in my response above to Steam, I was not saying 'all lives matter' as a counter to 'black lives matter'. I was using it as a statement of support. Yes, black lives DO matter, and that is why they should be treated the same as other live, but they don't currently appear to be, the systems do seem to be rigged against black lives, and its disgusting in this day and age that that is the case, I support BLM in its efforts for equality in the same way I support the feminist movement.

But the way it is currently being portrayed in the media is similar to how feminists were once portrayed as a bunch of women who hate men and don't shave. It's a completely inaccurate representation of the movement as a whole. But its the small minority of members that are like that, that are spoiling the reputation of the movement as a whole (which is why I said I hope BLM manages to distance itself from that inaccurate representation, in the same way feminism has done)

Apprentice to Maitre Chevalier Jedi Alexandre Orion

Moderator | Welcome Team | IP Team

IP Journal | IP Journal 2 | AP Journal | Open Journal

'The only contest any of us should be engaged in is with ourselves, to be better than yesterday'

- Knight Senan

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 8 months ago #286694 by
For those of you familiar with my posts, this is going to sound very familiar, but to me, it once again comes down to the revolution in communication.

During WWII, the public received news of the war at the movie theater or from the president. It was often days or weeks after the events occurred and it was sanitized for public consumption. A lot of it was propaganda. The rise of television changed all of this during the Vietnam conflict and the Civil Rights Movement. People were seeing the horrors as they happened on the nightly news. The brutality of war became real and the violent racism in the Southern United States became obvious and undeniable. The major media companies still controlled most of the information, but the journalists of the time were respected as objective reporters of facts. They presented the evidence and allowed the viewing audience to form an opinion.

BLM and other such groups have an opportunity that movements of the past did not. The rise of internet, social media, and satellite communication allows for video evidence to go viral in mere moments and lets people see things they would not ordinarily be exposed to. This is a good thing, when used objectively as it was in the past. It becomes dangerous when it is used in an inflammatory manner as it is now. Like the car accident analogy, people are drawn to the spectacular and are more likely to look at things that are out of the ordinary. This has given rise to social media SJWs who believe they can use the most egregious examples as supporting evidence for their righteousness while ignoring any evidence that would point to the contrary. It is irresponsible and it creates echo chambers among their followers where everyone just repeats what they hear from people they agree with rather than seeking the objective truth.

Free communication of information is crucial to our advancement. Imagine if slaves had Facebook in the 1700's or the Irish had YouTube during the Great Famine. The world would have probably reacted very differently and much sooner. But, if these tools are used irresponsibly to create division and suspicion, they won't help any movement achieve the goal, including BLM. Present the evidence, all of it, and let the truth speak for itself.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago - 6 years 8 months ago #286699 by OB1Shinobi

Rosalyn J wrote: No

I am saying, people point their cameras at fights and firey language in the same way that they slow their car down to look at an accident


i agree that this point does have merit. the mainstream media always misrepresents movements and protests...

but the crowd WAS chanting "we want dead cops now" wasnt it?
i mean, thats a valid point too, right?


Rosalyn J wrote: Yes, I am suggesting that the characterization of BLM as violent is due to our proclivity to document violence, activating language.

I haven't said anything about the characterization of BLM as racist, but I will now.

It feels, to me as a Black person, that when the argument Black Lives Matter is countered with All Lives Matter, it belittles my experience and my struggle. Society can SAY All Lives Matter, but what is put put in place? What do the systems say. BLM is the consequence of years of trying to come to the table, years of trying to get our voice heard and years of not being listened to.




this point is completely trivial next to the points that ive raised.
youre ignoring the real criticisms of the BLM movement in order to draw attention to your own personal feelings.

Rosalyn J wrote: So now our furry can be dismissed because we are not inclusive enough? We are not calm enough?



especially in regards to your choice of words "because we arent calm enough."

its one thing to respect people's right to have feelings, its another thing altogether to allow them to act out in ways that actually do hurt people. and im not talking about the "emotional violence" of someone disagreeing with you, im talking about real actual violence of rioting and attacking people and setting shit on fire.
yeah, fury needs to be kept under control, otherwise we all kill each other. no one should be allowed to sit at the grown up table if they cant control themselves like a grown up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_7HN_-hdh0

People are complicated.
Last edit: 6 years 8 months ago by OB1Shinobi.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago - 6 years 8 months ago #286700 by Kobos
Rosalyn I am posing this simply as a question. It will be applied by all ofus as a qustion of race but this is intended to be a question of logic and peace.

Your furry, should not be dismissed, however, many more people are hearing now; is the furry to express outrage worth the alienation of the very minds you are hoping to have listen (yes, many are hearing few are listening that was on purpose)? I am white, I don't know what it is like to be black I never will. I accept that and so I accept the furry left over from generations of oppression and inequality based on race because I have no experience to compare it to. It is why I work with inner-city education volunteering when they give me the chance this is one of the keys I believe to the continuation of the civil rights movement). Most people will always grasp for an experience they can relate it to though it is not even remotely close and there in lies where any movement needs to ask. When does the fury stop, and the teaching/reforming/and unifying force beyond anger begin? Also, it doesn't help that the media portrays things the way it does nor that factual information is hard to come by unless you look in the right places.

Simply a question, not in attack and I apologize if taken that way, just a food for thought question.

Sincerely,
Tim

The replies on this thread are quick so if this is now irrelevant sorry.......

What has to come ? Will my heart grow numb ?
How will I save the world ? By using my mind like a gun
Seems a better weapon, 'cause everybody got heat
I know I carry mine, since the last time I got beat
MF DOOM Books of War

Training Masters: Carlos.Martinez3 and JLSpinner
TB:Nakis
Knight of the Conclave
Last edit: 6 years 8 months ago by Kobos. Reason: Quick replies.
The following user(s) said Thank You: ZealotX

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago #286703 by ZealotX
I have to weigh in on this one and I apologize in advance if any of you are offended because that is not my goal. I shouldn't even have to say this but this is what we have to do when we have these potentially sensitive conversations. I love humans regardless of race or ethnicity. We all came from the same place and the same source and we are all beautiful and all life is precious. Racism is a cruel joke, not just on black people, but also on whites. It is ugly and it allows those who feel inferior to act with an authority given by the state that makes them feel superior... and that power... corrupts them. So we're not talking about all black people or all white people. This issue is a conflict between human beings and other human beings corrupted by power. Because of the TYPE of power and the METHOD of how that corruption is exercised there is a common description that emerges on both sides. Black on one side. Police on another. This doesn't mean it is black people against the police or police against black people. It simply means that the one group of humans in this particular conflict shares a racial identity in common because that racial identity is the subject of the oppression born from this corruption of which the shared identity happens to be police officers. That doesn't mean all blacks are the victims of racism or that all police are the villains. This doesn't mean whites aren't shot by cops. It simply means they are not shot by officers because of their race or where their race is a component of the decision to beat or murder them. We have to be careful with our words because the villains have been twisting our words in order to keep us from having meaningful and positive conversations that actually threaten the culture of racism that they want to uphold.

First, we need to, at some point, understand a few things:
1. There are varying degrees of racism.
2. It is possible to be racist subconsciously or be manipulated by a person who is racist.
3. Reverse racism doesn't exist. The reaction is not the same as the action that caused it.
4. Movements that create an unheard voice will attract those who feel like they haven't been heard
5. Movements are not a monolith and everyone in it will not totally agree on everything.
6. It's not cool to hijack another human's pain and suffering by trying to force mass inclusion. It belittles and drowns out the source of the pain.
7. Black people have had a different history with the police than whites. Period. There are whites that hate the police too but but the reason of race is unique to black people.
8. A lot of racist whites join the police force in an effort to subdue and mistreat black people
9. Most of the stories of blacks getting beaten and murdered by police are never counted and not publicly heard or disseminated
10. There is no reason to insert "white lives don't matter" into the statement "black lives matter". This is a form of transference as well as an effort to "muddy the waters"
11. Some, not all, policing evolved out of the slave catchers and some of that mentality still exists
12. Many police officers are "programmed" by a police culture to seek out black people as "the problem".
13. There is also an economic component in targeting minorities
14. Police violence in general is not the central issue or theme of BLM, but rather the RACIST targeting of unreasonable police violence and aggression.
15. The BLM organization cannot police every expression of anger or frustration on the part of every single person that wants to participate
16. The reasons for someone participating in a protest are not always in line with the organization's design leading people who take advantage of protests who are not truly BLM members or supporters but rather subversives with a different ideology and agenda. Confusing and conflating this with BLM is typically done in an effort to destroy BLM because a person is hostile to it because of the 2 sides of the conflict they find themselves more on the opposite side.

There are always 2 sides in a conflict. In this case people should at least try to understand both sides before they take one, especially if them taking a side leads to insensitive comments being posted on the internet. The conflict is deeper than just police brutality. Many black people feel like the police are more of an occupying force that is at war with them. During the Civil Rights movement it was the police that used hoses and dogs on people who were peacefully protesting. Why? What if they had been white? During the Civil Rights movements there were lynchings and symbolic crosses burned on black people's lawns. And there were assassinations. Why? What if they were white? During the Civil Rights movement black people were crying out in protest, with one voice, about a problem that affected them BECAUSE NO ONE WAS FIXING THE PROBLEM. If you think they wanted to be out there, risking/losing their jobs, risking their health and safety, marching until their legs hurt, running from dogs, and getting beaten in the streets by the police because it was fun... then you do not yet possess either the critical information or the critical thinking or the empathy necessary to judge.

And when there are 2 sides in a conflict and you see people who should be on your side, jump on the opposite side and attack you... if you're fighting against something that is 90% about RACISTS and 10% about violence because that the violence in this cases is a SYMPTOM of racism and white supremacy... then it is almost impossible for a white person jumping on the side of these RACISTS to look like they're not racists too.

But there's a problem. All cops aren't racist!

No, that's NOT a problem because it's called Black Lives Matter. Why do people feel like they need to add that? Possibly, because they assume black people don't know this?? On what basis does this assumption stand? Or is it a reaction to criticisms put out to SPIN BLM into a politically dangerous position? Did BLM ever say that black lives are threatened by ALL police officers? No, this is media/political spin meant to attack the movement with criticisms like attacking a Martin Luther King speech on account of typos and misspellings. Who would do that? So the reality is that there has been a FALSE NARRATIVE being perpetuated against BLM to malign it as "bad" so that the positive effects could be thwarted. How? Because in order for black lives to matter, they have to matter to WHITE PEOPLE. But if white people can be turned against BLM as a "movement" by politically assassinating the imperfect organization then someone's agenda is winning. Who's? Who wanted to cut the head off the snake? Who benefits if whites are able to ignore the BLM movement? Who would have benefitted the most if whites were able to fully ignore the Civil Rights Movement? Do you think that everyone who wanted to have a voice in the Civil Rights movement was entirely non-violent?

And why do we have this idea that when someone in this country is met with violence by the state the correct way to deal with it is a peaceful non-threatening protest? Historically, the founders of this country used violence to take this land from the Native Americans and the European governments that had legal claims. It was the destruction of property that made the Boston Tea Party famous as an event leading up to the American Revolution. But when its "not them"... certain whites simply cannot stand it and feel, because of common race, offended at the thought of racial issues in which they are asked to do or to be better. They're offended at the idea that racism is a white problem, not a black problem. And so any protest that suggests that they need to do something about it; that their inaction may even in fact be, in some cases, tacit approval, that they have to politically attack, not racist whites who are causing this reaction, but the reaction itself.

Do all lives matter? Yes. Do blue lives matter? Yes. No one said they didn't. No one said their value was any less. The people that introduce these distractions into the conversation are those who do not want the conversation and therefore try to derail it. As long as they aren't being targeted by police because they're white, the truth is they're okay with it. They're okay with Stop and Frisk. They're okay with a police state as long as it targets "the others".

If you were feeling sad today because your dog died... what if instead of showing empathy towards you and your personal situation, what if someone said "Hey all dogs lives matter and there are a lot of other people who lose their dogs, not just you!" What would you think about this person? Does the fact that other people lose their dogs too mean that you shouldn't be sad about your dog? Does it mean you should have a funeral for ALL the dogs that died? And if your neighbor murdered your dog because it pooped on his lawn do you have no right to be mad at your neighbor or try to sue him because the same thing happens with other dogs and other neighbors? If this sounds ridiculous to you it's because it is. #ALLLIVESMATTER and #BLUELIVESMATTER is simply an attack on the personal suffering of the black community and a condemnation of its reaction to RACISTS who wear badges and abuse their authority due to the fact that ALL lives have value, even those racists who are killing them. But no one ever stops a war and says "JAPANESE LIVES MATTER" or "NAZI LIVES MATTER". No, once there is an enemy who will not compromise they kill them with extreme violence. Where was "ALL LIVES MATTER" when America dropped the Atom bomb? How many civilians died? How many civilians died in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of "Freedom"? They're okay when it's happening to someone else and that's part of the real reason why Terrorism exists.

And finally where was ALL LIVES MATTER when the police were killing whites? Did white people collectively protest that? No? Why is it only used to counter someone else's protest? Let me give you a hint. It has nothing to do with a lack of inclusion. It is every bit a function of racism and white supremacy. Keep asking yourself one question. Who benefits?
The following user(s) said Thank You: OB1Shinobi

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
6 years 8 months ago #286704 by Wescli Wardest

Rosalyn J wrote: It feels, to me as a Black person, that when the argument Black Lives Matter is countered with All Lives Matter, it belittles my experience and my struggle. Society can SAY All Lives Matter, but what is put in place? What do the systems say. BLM is the consequence of years of trying to come to the table, years of trying to get our voice heard and years of not being listened to.


No one can argue someone’s feelings. At least I would hope no one would try such a thing. And yes, you may feel that saying all lives matters belittles your experience.

Now, from the other side of the coin… When Black lives matter is chanted in my face I feel as if there is some suggestion that I am being accused of not caring for a group of my fellow man. It is as if a group of people have decided that somehow my actions have warranted an outcry from people that feel I have in some way harmed them. It can easily be experienced as a very accusatory thing to proclaim that renders fault to all that are not black. But I chalk it up as it is not a personal attack or meant to be offesnive and I look for the common ground we share.

But, those are feelings that are experienced by those who through no fault of their own or their actions have.

I would never want to diminish the experience or feelings of another person or group. And at the same time I would like those same considerations made for myself.

Not to upset anyone, but when the message of a movement, protest or rally is lost on those that it is intended then does that gathering become a mob or a riot? If the message is the point of the gathering or group and that message is not received then is that method really effect at its purpose?

Interesting story…
Warning: Spoiler!
.

Monastic Order of Knights
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos, Rex

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
6 years 8 months ago #286705 by

Rosalyn J wrote: Yes, I am suggesting that the characterization of BLM as violent is due to our proclivity to document violence, activating language.

I haven't said anything about the characterization of BLM as racist, but I will now.

It feels, to me as a Black person, that when the argument Black Lives Matter is countered with All Lives Matter, it belittles my experience and my struggle. Society can SAY All Lives Matter, but what is put put in place? What do the systems say. BLM is the consequence of years of trying to come to the table, years of trying to get our voice heard and years of not being listened to.

So now our furry can be dismissed because we are not inclusive enough? We are not calm enough?


I understand now but I think you are incorrect in that assessment. As Senan says, there is just as much opportunity to get the good stuff out there as the bad stuff. They just don't seem to want to focus on that and instead just be pissed off without providing any real solution. My biggest problem is the implied hypocrisy in the movement itself. They claim they want equality and yet their very name implies segregation. When I see this sort of one sided bias I immediately dismiss it and I think many others do as well. Instead of fostering a culture of inclusion and cooperation it only serves to further segregate and polarize people.

Please Log in to join the conversation.