The Problem with Black Lives Matter

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.......

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?

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…
.

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.

OB1Shinobi wrote: 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.

that was not fair of me to say. i recognize i shouldnt have said it and i dont expect to be forgiven. i know it doesnt take away the feeling of being dismissed but i apologize for that comment.

Kobos wrote: 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.......

I really liked your post. Not every white person is as enlightened as the present company, especially to be able to recognize aspects of the issue such as "shared experiences" and the importance of empathy. The big takeaway here is that you understand that there is a shared experience at the heart of "being black". And it doesn't include you, by very nature of all the negative things that were done to black people by people who were acting in the interests of (rich) white people.

I wouldn't want you to have that shared experience simply because it wasn't good. Still isn't. We still face racism and the form it takes changes depending on where we are, what company we work for, etc. But we don't need you to share our experiences. We just need you to have enough empathy so that when one of ours gets killed, it's like one of yours getting killed. For some it is the same and that's real progress.

You asked where does the teaching/reforming/healing/etc. begin? Depending on where YOU are, YOU, by virtue of being different, change racism and the form it takes. Black people cannot solve this problem because it is self replicated in white culture. Let me give you a real example of something I personally experienced this spring.

I took my kids swimming at the YMCA. I'm black and I live in a upper-middle class neighborhood that is mostly black. I make way more money than the average African American. Unfortunately this is relevant to this story. My fiance also does very well financially and she put her kids in a better school which usually means for us that it is a school in a white neighborhood. My kids are from my previous marriage and they're homeschooled partially because of racism in education. Both of these options don't exist for most black families. The YMCA is down the street from the school my fiance's children attend; just so you understand the proximity to their daily lives. While we're swimming obviously white people are swimming too and everything's fine until...

A little white kid said something about my fiance's son being black and "white people are better".

I could have reacted but I held my peace. The white kid said this, not just in front of him, but in front of me and in front of his father. We were all within 5 feet of this. His father said nothing; offered nothing in the way of any apology, nor did I expect one because clearly that's most likely where he got it from. And if there was any correction, we didn't see it and it was after the fact and probably had more to do with saying it in front of us.

I would love for my children (my fiance's son is only 12) to grow up in a world without this perverse way of thinking but nothing I could say would have changed that kid's mind because that was parental authority being passed down. It was part of that child's culture just as much as the English language. So what am I supposed to do? What can I do? I can only tell you my story in hopes that your ears aren't deaf and hope that you have greater influence over kids like that than I, "the inferior one", could have. It has to come from white people.

The same way that BLM is somehow expected to police and control the expressions of every person, member or not, that comes out to join them in protest, we all have to share the burden of what our shared culture is teaching our kids. Do you think I teach my kids to hate white people? Absolutely not. But I cannot prevent them from forming negative feelings if they have consistently bad interactions with them. Fortunately mine don't and they have all had/have white friends who I assume don't treat them as inferior.

The solution could only be the influence of black people getting the attention of white people so that white people use their influence to get the attention of the white people who are programmed not to listen to us and who don't care about us, to those to whom our lives truly do not matter, and influence them towards change or be a light for their children to show them that not all white people think they are superior to other humans and that what you own, or your socio-economic status, doesn't make you superior. I probably make more than that kid's father, but does it matter? At all? Absolutely not. Before BLM most black-white interactions were superficial because they did not deal with racial issues. So even if you think a black person is your friend, if they're not cool enough with you to talk about race, it's possible that they don't trust you that far based on a history of whites who didn't want to talk about it because they didn't care enough to or just wish the topic would just go away even though the effects of it are alive and well.

We say black lives matter only because, to some, we know they don't. Even if you believe saying ALL LIVES MATTER accomplishes the same thing; it doesn't. Because the fact that it was created to COUNTER the statement that black lives matter, means that it is designed to ignore, specifically, black lives as a racial group being actively and systematically oppressed. ALL LIVES are not being oppressed based on race. White men in suits are not stopped and frisked. There are no establishments that deny whites entry or service because you wear clothes thought to be part of white culture. No one shoots you because you're wearing a hoodie or playing loud music. ALL LIVES aren't faced with the same issues for the same reasons. And the statistics for UNARMED police shootings is evidence of this.

The Solutions of BLM are mostly related to policing. They have successfully pushed for policy changes and as a result more police are using body cams and there's more community oversight. These policy changes benefit white people too. So what it's called Black Lives Matter? What's the difference between us saying it and having to fill out "Black" or "African American" on application forms and documents? We don't know how that's being used. What we do know is when we give our children names that sound more "white" than "black" they have an easier time getting jobs. It's been proven. What's the solution? Again... influence. The best thing I can do is raise the level of consciousness around me and try to make other black people better - whom I have greater influence over, and hope that something I say in the presence of whites is able to cause one of you to say something different, do something different, to lessen the effect or hinder the reproduction of racism.

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?

Be grateful you get away with it for now. Feminists got what they wanted using this method because they had pussy power and the blokes didn't see it coming, thought that nice things would happen if they themselves were nice. How mistaken they were, It has proven catastrophic, I don't think these days people are going to fall for it again.

So I'd tell BLM to keep heading that way if they want to discover what's 1000 times worse than trump, whose election into power is a direct result of BLM and feminism.

My opinion of BLM:
Before BLM: cops are trigger-happy cunts, after BLM: Hmm looks to me like they may have had genuine reasons to shoot first and ask questions later.

My wife is black my kids are tanned, I have every reason in the world to want an end to BLM, they are a threat to my family's continued existence. BLM's "me me me but not you" approach only serves to create enemies they once did not have. It belittles everyone else's experiences and their struggles, and everyone who isn't black is not a minority. Feminists could because they attacked a minority on whom they could exercise pussy power, an abuse of nature they are starting to pay for by no longer getting any respect. BLM has no chance whatsoever with this kind of rhetoric, unless they significantly correct their ways things are going to be increasingly brutal for blacks in america.

Brick wrote:

steamboat28 wrote:

Brick wrote: 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'.

I agree with you but I also disagree, and this will be confusing, but here's why:

"Black Lives Matter Too" is syntactically more correct. It was even on the BLM website as part of the explanation for why BLM exists. However, the hijacking of which you speak, wasn't simply performed by morons and idiots, but also by smart people who understand politics and social engineering.

NO ONE stands up and says "yes, you're right. this is wrong. All lives matter and should be treated equally". I know that's how it should be and how it happens in people's minds, but that's not real. No, someone had an epiphany about how to "deal with" the BLM movement using public criticism. Those people influence other people to think "there's something wrong with these BLM people." "These BLM people are racist!" Why? Because one of the unwritten rules of US society is that you do NOT call white people out on their racism. Am I saying all whites are racists? Absolutely not. But if someone here wanted to "race-bait" they would twist my words to make it sound like I was accusing all whites of being racists which is false or "alternative facts". These falsehoods are what the "alt-right" thrives on. White people who are actual racists do NOT want other white people to be inclusive or to even care about black people. Just as the term "nigger" existed, so did "nigger lover" which was also extremely bad. So again... these white people who are saying ALL LIVES MATTER are saying it in OPPOSITION. But since it is a fair statement to make in general and it is syntactically correct it causes logical whites who disagree with the racists, to agree logically, with the statement the racists put out there in OPPOSITION. And that's what was designed to happen.

Black Lives Matter was a slogan that whites also chanted and also supported because it was bigger than whose black and whose white. Saying ALL LIVES MATTER was created to disrupt that harmony (not unity but harmony) and create a counter movement against the Black Lives Matter movement. Two movements of the same size will cancel each other out. The problem is that a black movement cannot equal the size of a white movement because of the population and economic differences. So even getting "some" whites to advance this "alt-slogan" was enough to diminish the public awareness and credibility of the BLM movement. When you know your political opponent is going to trash you in the media you throw mud too. But if you know your political opponent is going to tell the truth about you then you discredit them. Why put a black sheriff on TV to criticize the Black Lives Matter movement if you weren't politically attacking it? It was skillfully done and this is what made the BLM movement lose steam. Because it was an attack it will always be an attack. ALL LIVES DO MATTER. But I shouldn't have to say this unless someone else is saying/suggesting I'm not. Black Lives Matter Too, but I shouldn't have to say the "too" unless someone else is saying/suggesting I'm not already implying it. And who would do that except for someone who already views me as an opponent?

ren wrote: My wife is black my kids are tanned, I have every reason in the world to want an end to BLM, they are a threat to my family's continued existence. BLM's "me me me but not you" approach only serves to create enemies they once did not have.

unfortunately, this is proof of what I was saying about ALL LIVES MATTER being a skillful political attack against the movement.

BLM is not in any way a threat to you or your family. You've been lied to by those who were already enemies of BLM before the organization ever existed.

ZealotX wrote: 2. It is possible to be racist subconsciously or be manipulated by a person who is racist.

im not sure what you meant with "or be manipulated by a person who is racist" so i cant respond to that part, but i have something of an objection to the idea of "unconscious racism." is it possible that you mean "ingrained racism"? like if someone goes to prison and lives in strict racial segregation for some number of years and then returns to society, theyve still got that ingrained sense of racial competition...?

comfort comes from familiarity; human beings are naturally uncomfortable with things that are unfamiliar. we become comfortable with something once we have spent enough time with it that we can feel safe. for the majority of people, the people of their own racial group are immediately more familiar. its normal to be uncomfortable with people from other races if you havent spent a lot of time with people from other races, especially since racism is such a hot issue. being uncomfortable with people who are different and that you are unfamiliar with is not quite the same thing as being a racist.

actual real racism is an overt belief in racial superiority or inferiority of one race relative to another.
thats not unconscious.

ZealotX wrote: 3. Reverse racism doesn't exist. The reaction is not the same as the action that caused it.

i dont know your context for this statement so could you tell me what the word "racism" means to you?
is racism something that only white people are capable of, in your opinion?

ZealotX wrote: 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.

if this is in response to the "all lives matter" point then fair enough, especially since the group actually has the word "black" in its name, however
1) they want white people to help support the movement,
2) when youre building a group whose essential premise is justified by the assertion that racism is a problem, you undermine yourself by being racially exclusive. it suggests to observers that you actually are just fine with racism, so long as its only affecting some other race.

ZealotX wrote: 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.

i agree with this as a matter of historical fact. yes police have targeted blacks more than other races. im with you.
but one of my complaints with the BLM movement is that they dont recognize the degree to which police brutality in its modern form, is to a great degree an issue of the culture being "police vs everyone else", and not merely "racist white police vs innocent black people"


"Police Kill Too Many People—White and Black"
https://time.com/4404987/police-violence/

ZealotX wrote: 8. A lot of racist whites join the police force in an effort to subdue and mistreat black people

maybe this is true but can you prove it? do you have some evidence other than your intuition?
mostly what i see these days is people going from the military to police force after they get back from the wars... then acting towards citizens with the same mindset that they had towards the iraqis: that of an occupying force.

cops and steroids (you say racism, i say steroids)

"steroids may be behind the aggressive behavior of US police"
https://www.mintpressnews.com/steroids-may-behind-aggressive-behavior-us-police/219984/

ZealotX wrote: 9. Most of the stories of blacks getting beaten and murdered by police are never counted and not publicly heard or disseminated

the same can be said for almost all cases of whites being killed by police... but not only does BLM ignore the full scope of police brutality, to make it even worse they seem to only want to riot and set things on fire when the cops kill someone who was asking for it- yes, asking for it.
call me a racist cracker if you want to but when someone grabs a cops gun it is perfectly reasonable when that person gets shot. fighting with the police when they go to arrest you gets you shot. im white and i know this. the cops would shoot me too if i punched one of them in the face or pointed a gun (or something that looked like a gun) at them or didnt put down a gun that i was holding.

so if BLM would stay focused on shootings where theres actually a case to be made that it wasnt justifiable, that would help a lot.
"Black Lives Matter Is Pushing Our Cities Back to the Brink"
https://www.nationalreview.com/article/438992/milwaukee-riot-black-lives-matter-police-homicide-rate-khalif-rainey

ZealotX wrote: 11. Some, not all, policing evolved out of the slave catchers and some of that mentality still exists

well this could be true but again, any evidence besides rumor and intuition?

13. There is also an economic component in targeting minorities[/quote]
minorities are a lot more vulnerable for a number of reasons but the economic incentive is simply to generate funds for the local municipalities and to pack the prisons full of fresh bodies. its a lot bigger than race but race is a big part of it, mostly because racial minorities are more accessible and justifiable targets

"Empty Cages Collective: what is the prison industrial complex?"
https://www.prisonabolition.org/what-is-the-prison-industrial-complex/

ZealotX wrote: 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.

i think theres more than two sides but yeah i agree

ZealotX wrote: 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.

im on the side that says "all bigotry is bad no matter who it is coming from and no matter who it is directed towards. people should be judged as individuals not by their group associations"

im completely opposed to any other position, and how that might look to anyone else is secondary: its the position i believe is right.

ZealotX wrote: 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?

because we have a legal system that is predicated on the rule that we dont murder each other. i understand that the BLM position is that cops are murdering blacks, but once you decide that violence is a legitimate tool in your tool kit, youve transitioned into being a terrorist organization.
neither of us want the state to decide that it has the justification to declare martial law and thats the kindof outcome youre going to get.

ZealotX wrote: 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.

we used to cure illness with leeches

ok im not going to quote more, im neglecting something else because i keep coming back to this lol
you raise some good points and we actually have some at least slight overlap of opinion, but also definitely some areas of disagreement. i did appreciate your posts.

---

EDIT

somewhat contrary to everything i just said, this guy is a former baltimore cop who says that institutional racism is definitely real in the police forces of the usa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ndg-JGmYryA

Brick wrote: 'Black Lives Matter Too'

BLM2, nice
Serves to rebrand organization from the out of control broader movement, sounds less hypocritical, is more inclusive and as a result sounds more like marginalization and victimization of that group ie 'making being a minority work for them' type of vibe, a new improved version 2.0, etc.

ZealotX wrote: 3. Reverse racism doesn't exist. The reaction is not the same as the action that caused it.

Can you clarify that for me? We don't talk about racism too much where I'm at, unless it happens.
IMO it can have a meaning, just like it also can be self refuting idea. How it's used in this context I think represents the instances where victims of discrimination use discrimination as the mechanism to counter the source of discrimination. That is generally seen as counter-productive by those who are combating discrimination using non-discriminatory means, and so from that experience that particular meaning to the phrases might have emerged. From that point of view it is valid, true and accurate, albeit it is inviting misunderstanding by using what almost sounds like double negative lol.

Adder wrote:

Brick wrote: 'Black Lives Matter Too'

BLM2, nice
Serves to rebrand organization from the out of control broader movement, sounds less hypocritical, is more inclusive and as a result sounds more like marginalization and victimization of that group ie 'making being a minority work for them' type of vibe, a new improved version 2.0, etc.

The problem is that the name was never the problem. And if they changed it there would simply be another "problem" created in order to criticize it because at the end of the day there are a lot of racists out there who simply don't like it. For example. Trump started calling Hillary Clinton "crooked Hillary", not because he actually thinks she's a crook because he's 100 times more crooked than she is and she is a saint in comparison, but because it was a political attack. Hillary Clinton couldn't rebrand herself or change her name and she was unable to outwit the attack. Unfortunately, the minds attacking BLM aren't stupid. They knew what they were doing and their attack was designed to turn whites against BLM and it worked.

Adder wrote:

ZealotX wrote: 3. Reverse racism doesn't exist. The reaction is not the same as the action that caused it.

Can you clarify that for me? We don't talk about racism too much where I'm at, unless it happens.
IMO it can have a meaning, just like it also can be self refuting idea. How it's used in this context I think represents the instances where victims of discrimination use discrimination as the mechanism to counter the source of discrimination. That is generally seen as counter-productive by those who are combating discrimination using non-discriminatory means, and so from that experience that particular meaning to the phrases might have emerged. From that point of view it is valid, true and accurate, albeit it is inviting misunderstanding by using what almost sounds like double negative lol.

Sure. First of all, racism is often conflated with prejudice. Prejudice is often based on experiences while racism is a power dynamic. Second, let's say that you don't like me because I'm taller than you. This is about as stupid as color. If you keep attacking me, calling me names, refusing to hire me, etc. because I'm taller than you and my emotional reaction is to hate you then my hatred is more about your mistreatment. I don't hate you because you're shorter than me. I hate you because you suck as a human so much to hate me over something so stupid as height. Yes, you happen to be shorter and if enough short people seemed to feel the same way as you I would be more critical of shorter people because of my experience of dealing with the mistreatment/oppression of shorter people. But my reaction isn't stupid. It's a reaction to how I'm being treated where as the treatment is not a reaction to anything. It is created from an inflated sense of self (or over reaction to one's own inferiority) that comes to believe it is superior to others.

I'm sure you can find black people who think they're superior to whites, but again, this is a reaction that wouldn't exist on its own. The problem with "Reverse racism" is that whites often use it as an example to say "See... you guys do the same thing" which allows them to continue the status quo. The status quo is the problem.

I fully support BLM -- as it is defined by its primary leaders and thinkers, not as it is defined by its fringe elements.
People love generalizing the movement, and anyone who operates within the same spheres of thought and action as so-called SJWs (horrible terminology to use). However the generalization doesn't help. There are very important points being made within the BLM movement and similar spheres of thought and action, and while I find many of the more aggressive elements to be deeply troubling, I personally have attempted to not internalize a response to those elements and rather focus on their larger constructive potential and nature.

ZealotX wrote: Sure. First of all, racism is often conflated with prejudice. Prejudice is often based on experiences while racism is a power dynamic.

Sure, but power is contextual to the relationships between individuals and there are many different kinds of it The city bus drive has more institutional power than anyone else on the bus regardless of any of their races. But if someone draws a pistol, that person holds greater power of violence than anyone else on the bus, until the police arrive. If a hostage negotiator shows up, he will be attempting to exercise his power of articulation, and persuasion to overcome the hostage takers greater power of violence. As long as the guy with the gun doesnt shoot, the negotiator has power of command. Soon as a shot is fired command goes over to the entry team commander. None of these powers are predicated on race.

If i apply for a loan at the bank or for benefits with a government agency, there are people who work in those settings of all races who have greater institutional power than i do. Greater access and also greater understanding of a particular environment that is important to me. I am truely under their power, regardless of our racial differences.

Second, let's say that you don't like me because I'm taller than you. This is about as stupid as color. If you keep attacking me, calling me names, refusing to hire me, etc. because I'm taller than you and my emotional reaction is to hate you then my hatred is more about your mistreatment. I don't hate you because you're shorter than me. I hate you because you suck as a human so much to hate me over something so stupid as height. Yes, you happen to be shorter and if enough short people seemed to feel the same way as you I would be more critical of shorter people because of my experience of dealing with the mistreatment/oppression of shorter people. But my reaction isn't stupid. It's a reaction to how I'm being treated where as the treatment is not a reaction to anything. It is created from an inflated sense of self (or over reaction to one's own inferiority) that comes to believe it is superior to others.

Which is a perfecty valid argument for why you have every right to be angry at every single person who mistreated you, and to be skeptical of others who resemble that person. But it doesnt prove that blacks cant be racist.

if a white kid gets beat up by a group of black kids because the black kids parents taught their children that white people deserve to be beaten up because they are all devils or something, thats racism: a power dynamic where the powerful party inflicted injustice on the less powerful party as a result of racial prejudice. Its just as much an act of racism as it is when white kids beat up a black kid because the white kids parents taught their children that black people deserve to be beaten up. Power is contextual.

I'm sure you can find black people who think they're superior to whites, but again, this is a reaction that wouldn't exist on its own.

Bigotry and "in group vs out group" hostility is natural to every race and culture.. its a human thing not a white thing..
but i agree that the historical treatment of blacks in usa was terrible and i dont blame black people for being pissed off and for wanting equality.. maybe we should leave it at that.

The problem with "Reverse racism" is that whites often use it as an example to say "See... you guys do the same thing" which allows them to continue the status quo. The status quo is the problem.

To my knowledge, the term "reverse discrimination" is related to institutional policies like affirmative action, where persons of a minority group are given preferential treatment over individuals from a majority group in the context of some specific institutional setting. Whereas "reverse racism" just means any act of racism by a member of a minority group to a member of a majority group.

I do agree that there have been whites who have used "reverse racism/discrimination" to paint an unrealistic picture of a twisted kind of equality. Im also willing to call that out when i see it, but real equality needs to be the end game and youre not gonna get that holding on to the idea that only whites can be racist. That view defies logic, is inherently double standarded, and will perpetuate racism from all sides.

Hypothetically the standards need to be the same for everyone. In certain contexts you can say the opportunities arent the same and thats why the standards cant be the same. Which leads to the conclusion that increasing access of economic opportunity to the black community is the real solution to racism. In a market driven society, Money + Time = Equality

Which has nothing to do with protesting or rioting

The guy in this video has it wrong. Those aren't the problem(s) with Black Lives Matter. Actually, no I take that back- he gave one point that is valid-that the protesters are known turn violent during periods or extreme stress over a situation. The other points are invalid.

It should all be replaced with the sentence: The problem with BLM, is that all they do is generate awareness, and do not take up this opportunity to actually research how to resolve the issue. They don't put efforts forth in changing local laws, they just protest. That's the problem, they offer no solutions and just expect others to resolve the issue because they want it resolved.

But they have to get into Police Academies and find out what is being taught, undergo training exercises and see if there are other options to situations. They have to put forward real effort into researching what methods can be employed to ensure people are properly evaluated for their jobs, etc.

If they want to see change, they have to get off the streets and into the field to help Police find other methods, build programs that help reduce people's "want" to commit crime. Etc. It's not something you just protest away.

ZealotX wrote: You asked where does the teaching/reforming/healing/etc. begin? Depending on where YOU are, YOU, by virtue of being different, change racism and the form it takes. Black people cannot solve this problem because it is self replicated in white culture. Let me give you a real example of something I personally experienced this spring.


A little white kid said something about my fiance's son being black and "white people are better".

I could have reacted but I held my peace. The white kid said this, not just in front of him, but in front of me and in front of his father. We were all within 5 feet of this. His father said nothing; offered nothing in the way of any apology, nor did I expect one because clearly that's most likely where he got it from. And if there was any correction, we didn't see it and it was after the fact and probably had more to do with saying it in front of us.

I would love for my children (my fiance's son is only 12) to grow up in a world without this perverse way of thinking but nothing I could say would have changed that kid's mind because that was parental authority being passed down. It was part of that child's culture just as much as the English language. So what am I supposed to do? What can I do? I can only tell you my story in hopes that your ears aren't deaf and hope that you have greater influence over kids like that than I, "the inferior one", could have. It has to come from white people.

Absolutely not. But I cannot prevent them from forming negative feelings if they have consistently bad interactions with them. Fortunately mine don't and they have all had/have white friends who I assume don't treat them as inferior.

The solution could only be the influence of black people getting the attention of white people so that white people use their influence to get the attention of the white people who are programmed not to listen to us and who don't care about us, to those to whom our lives truly do not matter, and influence them towards change or be a light for their children to show them that not all white people think they are superior to other humans and that what you own, or your socio-economic status, doesn't make you superior. I probably make more than that kid's father, but does it matter? At all? Absolutely not. Before BLM most black-white interactions were superficial because they did not deal with racial issues. So even if you think a black person is your friend, if they're not cool enough with you to talk about race, it's possible that they don't trust you that far based on a history of whites who didn't want to talk about it because they didn't care enough to or just wish the topic would just go away even though the effects of it are alive and well.

We say black lives matter only because, to some, we know they don't. Even if you believe saying ALL LIVES MATTER accomplishes the same thing; it doesn't. Because the fact that it was created to COUNTER the statement that black lives matter, means that it is designed to ignore, specifically, black lives as a racial group being actively and systematically oppressed. ALL LIVES are not being oppressed based on race. White men in suits are not stopped and frisked. There are no establishments that deny whites entry or service because you wear clothes thought to be part of white culture. No one shoots you because you're wearing a hoodie or playing loud music. ALL LIVES aren't faced with the same issues for the same reasons. And the statistics for UNARMED police shootings is evidence of this.

The Solutions of BLM are mostly related to policing. They have successfully pushed for policy changes and as a result more police are using body cams and there's more community oversight. These policy changes benefit white people too. So what it's called Black Lives Matter? What's the difference between us saying it and having to fill out "Black" or "African American" on application forms and documents? We don't know how that's being used. What we do know is when we give our children names that sound more "white" than "black" they have an easier time getting jobs. It's been proven. What's the solution? Again... influence. The best thing I can do is raise the level of consciousness around me and try to make other black people better - whom I have greater influence over, and hope that something I say in the presence of whites is able to cause one of you to say something different, do something different, to lessen the effect or hinder the reproduction of racism.

I wanted to take the time to hank you for the well thought out answer. I also appreciate the flattery, it does however, suck that I am considered different though as I'm simply being empathetic towards another human experience, but it simply came from doing something you mentioned in another post. I had a deep long conversation with my roommate (he was obviously black and also from the South Side of Chicago) in college about race. Interestingly enough it came from a discussion on a vibe I picked up from some gentlemen who came over to get green. I could tell they were unsavory to say the least, for perspective I spent a good amount of time selling (I do not anymore but everyone was young and only green, no other drugs), that means exposure to a different set of principles to judge upon. Criminals shouldn't really judge criminals but it becomes a safety issue when money and other stuff is involved. My assumption was right; but we had a deep conversation about what caused my predisposition in that situation. He decided my concern was founded in logic, but he also shared some experiences and ways of looking at racism I didn't really think of from my perspective along the way. "It's not the overt S$3T that get's to me, it's the subtle stuff that bothers me, like someone not meeting a gaze or someone assuming my course of action without relation." That was his statement was an eye opener. The assumption of socio-economic status by race is an example.

I applaud your temperance in the scenario above, I would have had a serious talk with my child about any statement like that (It was how I was raised). I run into stuff like this more than I would like to say, particularly, working in a suburban high-school setting. However, though I'm not the parent, so beyond letting them know they don't understand the experience and that maybe they should look a little open minded, or that they are just being stupid my influence on them is limited. However, influence I have to use none the less. I agree though that the solution does in a way start with me but in general it starts with all of us. We each have a role to play here and each of our actions should and need share a general attachment to one another. I can and have reached to those around me about racism it is the minimum I can do. I agree that the movement cannot police the whole of itself it is not possible in an movement/organization after certain size. However, word of mouth particularly now with social media holds a new power, so any uncultivated action by those in leadership (tend to be positive statements) and those not (the less positive ones that are very popularly thrown around) can be devistating or incredibly up lifting. With this in mind I think we need to look at why the most shocking and ignorant statements tend to sway public opinion and how to make that shift; that and education both in general and on different cultural perspective are where we can start in my opinion.

This dialogue here, though I am sure frustrating and painful to some, is incredibly important to keep going while it maintains its course of civil dialog with presentation of at least path ways to solutions. I appreciate the peacefulness of this thread and hope it continues; the more perspectives we each strive to understand the better. just never try to understand a perspective from your perspective, objectivity is key or you will become judgmental of given situation (history major in college.....) Thank you everyone for your contributions please keep it peaceful. Adder thanks for your contribution I think it helps to see an outside the US (it also, makes us define , think and consider the simpler parts of the dialog in the US (we don't tend to do this much in the US on issues that are difficult), when most the time we are arguing finer points with fervent passion) perspective on this too. This will not be without effect on emotions but the community will be better served by temperance here than flaring tempers (steps off soap box, takes soap box, burns soap box, realizes he's an a-hole for standing on it, then wonders how he got a wood soap box these days in the first place.)

In Peace and Respect,
Tim

I appreciate your response and the opportunity to further discuss this important issue. Thank you listening with an open mind. Even if we ultimately disagree I want you to know that this was and is a good conversation and just the fact that we're able to have it is progress. So thank you for being a part of that and I don't want you to take anything I say as any sort of hostility or anything negative aimed at you. I hold you in high regard.

OB1Shinobi: is it possible that you mean "ingrained racism"?

No, I literally mean people who aren't consciously aware of their own racist tendencies and who would not identify themselves as racists. Racism isn't a feeling or something that is always easily quantified. You may subconsciously treat one person better than another and justify it consciously with other things that have nothing to do with race. But if we could take every occurrence and measure the variables and come up with analytics of that person's actions we would, in some cases, find that a person's behavior changes when a black person is involved. For example, you can have a boss that consistently passes on giving a black employee a promotion. The first justification might be reasonable and professional. The second time they're passed over it might be because they like this other person better. The third time it might be some random memory of something they did that they didn't like. Meanwhile, the people being promoted may be less professional, less liked around to office, less professional, and make more mistakes. The boss may not even realize that there is subtle component in his decision making that is based on prejudice; based on prior thinking or ideas that have nothing to do with this person but rather their race.

OB1Shinobi: being uncomfortable with people who are different and that you are unfamiliar with is not quite the same thing as being a racist.

Why are they different? What makes them different? Does race really make someone different? If I said I was uncomfortable around midgets, what would you think about me? Girls and boys are more different than 2 people of the same gender from different "races". Keep in mind that race is an invented construct. We weren't created at different times or different planets. The only difference is literally pigmentation. But is a blond uncomfortable around a brunette? Is a person with brown eyes (which can be white or black) uncomfortable around someone with blue eyes? Do you get what I'm saying? Why is it the only difference that seems to matter is a difference that was invented and is incredibly superficial. So what does this mean? In my opinion, it means that we MAGNIFY the difference when it comes to color and that magnification is caused by racism. Now maybe a white person is equally uncomfortable around Mexicans. However, they may not be uncomfortable with a white person from Spain, England, Holland, Russia, etc. They may never even ask or contemplate where that "other white person" comes from or where their genes came from. I was born in the US, not Africa. I watch the same shows, the same movies, have the same interests, etc. I should have more in common with white Americans than white people from South Africa and yet white people might feel more comfortable around Elon Musk than me. I love Elon Musk, btw. Just do. But how does one explain this racial discomfort if it is not racism? This also goes back to the point I made that you can be manipulated by real racists even if you're not racist yourself. Because the cultural ideas about black people (stereotypes) may get started by a racist but picked up by others who don't realize they're accepting a fundamentally racist idea. Sometimes, it is the stigmas and stereotypes that affect us more than overt racism. Most racism is not overt because there are consequences. I had white friends in school because I went to a mostly white school in my early elementary years. I had zero issues. I wasn't uncomfortable around my friends. I also had white friends in middle school and high school because I saw them as being the same as me. I only become less comfortable when I have reason to believe a person is racist because of what they may be thinking or saying behind my back. And honestly, that's what keeps a lot of black people at a distance. Those that kind of grow up with us? They're fine because we know them and they know us. A part of knowing us is knowing that we're not scary monsters who want to eat their children. Fear is what makes people uncomfortable. And people usually fear what they don't know. I have a solution for that. Explore. Get to know. Gain understanding. Then the next generation can be taught that we're all the same. Babies come out this way. We're the ones that teach them otherwise.

OB1Shinobi:i dont know your context for this statement so could you tell me what the word "racism" means to you?
is racism something that only white people are capable of, in your opinion?

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/member-discussions/118436-the-problem-with-black-lives-matter?start=30#286771

OB1Shinobi: if this is in response to the "all lives matter" point then fair enough, especially since the group actually has the word "black" in its name, however

1) they want white people to help support the movement,
2) when you're building a group whose essential premise is justified by the assertion that racism is a problem, you undermine yourself by being racially exclusive. it suggests to observers that you actually are just fine with racism, so long as its only affecting some other race.

Why does having "black" in the name a problem? If I had a penny for every time a NON-RACIST police officer used the word "black" to describe a suspect, I'd have more money than Bill Gates. No one sees that as a problem. And when talking about a criminal it's no problem for the News to identify the suspect as "black". I think it's essential that black is in the name because that identifies who this problem is happening to. It's not happening to white people. You might say "yes it is! We have statistics too!" I repeat. It's not happening to white people.

The thing that's not happening to white people is being targeting based on race or ethnicity. What's not happening to white people are racially motivated beatings or shootings. If a racist cop pulls me over he's a racist cop. If the same cop pulls you over he's just a cop. That's the difference. He's not going to treat you the same way he treats me. The reason why this is essential to understand is because you cannot deal with racism in the police culture by ignoring the racial component. You have to begin screening racism out of police culture. You have to have consequences for using racially charged language that indicates how you think and process information. BLM isn't saying that cops are perfect other than this issue we are complaining about. BLM has no obligation to say "and this is how they treat the mentally challenged" even though that is an issue.

The more issues you put on the table the less will get done about any of them. And their effect will be diluted. Do you think we all have time to march for every issue in the world? Of course not. PETA is for the ethical treatment of animals, not people. So even if you disagree with their "priorities" and you want them to be about ethical treatment of all species, including human, there's nothing wrong with specializing in one cause. It seems that the only time people are not allowed to represent their own cause that hits closest to their home is when they're black. Nope. Not allowed to speak up for yourselves. You must speak up for ALL people. If you speak for yourselves we'll suddenly speak for all people just to speak over you but we won't really do anything about what we're protesting or push for any change that affects ALL lives.

The name of the organization isn't Black People who believe Black Lives Matter. It's JUST Black Lives Matter. Plenty of white people can agree that "Black Lives Matter". If you can agree then how are you not included? If PETA sends me a email asking for a signature or donation I don't have to be a Polar bear or an elephant to want to save polar bears and elephants. So when they say "please help us save polar bears" it would be kind of an asshole move on my part to angrily respond "WHAT ABOUT BLACK BEARS?!" No one's stopping anyone else from taking up the cause of Black Bears, is there? So why pit one against the other as if you're not allowed to fight for polar bears if you don't include black bears or brown bears?? BLM never said "please kill white people instead of us". BLM never made a case for when police violence is okay.

If I repost something about saving polar bears it's probably got something to do with Global Warming. That's not the same thing as me saying "Hey Black Bears. F#$k You guys. Seriously. And Brown Bears? Yeah, you guys can F off too." No one's saying this. So why, again, does it seem like black people are the only ones that aren't allowed to complain about something happening to them. RACISM. Do black people have to say "White Lives Matter" and hope some white organization will return the favor? When Christian Children's fund made all those commercials about helping starving people in Africa were they wrong because it's name wasn't inclusive of adults? Are there no starving adults in Africa? What about them? What about the elderly? And what about India or China? No one's starving in those continents? Doesn't criticizing Christian Children's fund sound stupid?

Were the people saying Blue Lives Matter seriously protesting Gang Members who shoot at the police? Seriously? No, they were only attacking BLM which has a history of shooting ZERO police officers. ALL LIVES MATTER and BLUE LIVES MATTER were a protest of the protesters. Can you look me in the eye and tell me that ALL LIVES MATTER was aimed at the Police??? If we're being honest you have to admit that it was aimed at BLM. So the purpose of these things should be clear. They were ONLY attacks. It was never about All lives mattering (even though it is syntactically and theoretically correct) or BLUE lives mattering because NONE of these people confronted the people who are actually guilty of endangering what they were supposedly standing for. Not to mention, DEATH ROW LIVES MATTER, OBAMACARE LIVES MATTER, TALIBAN LIVES MATTER, MUSLIM EXTREMISTS LIVES MATTER, right? Aren't the part of "ALL LIVES"????? But when same people on the news who support ALL LIVES MATTER almost wet themselves at the "beauty" of American bombs launching against their targets... what happened to ALL LIVES then? It's a BS argument and you're not supposed to realize that.

When I was in school I looked at myself and I didn't see a black person. I literally rebelled against the label because my skin is brown, not black. "Black" to me, seemed more like an exaggeration meant to denigrate everyone that looked like me. Later I fully embraced the label because it means more than a color and at the end of the day we don't change things by complaints, protests, etc. We change things by accepting reality. The reality is that there is a lot of racism in police culture because of socio-economic factors as well as white culture repeating it and proliferating it. Just do a google search for "black face" or "lynching". We're not trying to make this stuff up. We're simply trying to communicate what's been happening to us for many years which is why we, as a social group, do not trust the police which in turn makes their jobs harder and makes them less effective against crime. We're not pro-crime but if the police are criminals too and racism is institutionalized in our Criminal Justice system, then our reaction is a natural one. It's not about who's black and who isn't. We need to destroy racism. And if human beings don't want to help then okay, but why then attack the movement that's raising awareness and working for change? Unless you're against that change?

ZealotX wrote: 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.

i agree with this as a matter of historical fact. yes police have targeted blacks more than other races. im with you.
but one of my complaints with the BLM movement is that they dont recognize the degree to which police brutality in its modern form, is to a great degree an issue of the culture being "police vs everyone else", and not merely "racist white police vs innocent black people"

OB1Shinobi, you're an intelligent person. What if I listed all of my criticisms about the Occupy Wall Street movement and said "For these reasons it should not exist". Occupy made a lot of mistakes. Is there a problem with the distribution of wealth in the US? ABSOLUTELY. In many ways I believe this problem is bigger than racism by 10 times or more. But what were the demands of the movement? Do you remember? Did you ever know? And ultimately, what changed? What did Occupy accomplish? What if I told you that my criticisms against Occupy Wall Street were more important than the mission of Occupy Wall Street? What if I went out and publicly criticized it over and over. Would I be helping the cause? Or helping people to see that the movement is irrelevant because I think so? I'm okay with people having criticisms about BLM. The problem was that the criticisms of BLM were often simply attacks used to discredit and destroy the movement by people who didn't want it to exist. The people shouting All Lives Matter weren't trying to change the name of the organization. There was a comment form on their website where that could have been done. I used their comment form myself even. When someone wants to offer constructive criticism there is a way to do it. And you know the kind of criticism it is based on how it's given. These weren't just criticisms. There was a backlash against what they were protesting. One of the criticisms that I heard a lot about BLM was that "black people kill each other more than anyone else". That criticism has nothing to do with a name or someone not feeling included. That's someone saying that black people have a problem that whites do not and if they fix their own problem then maybe we'll listen or maybe we'll care. It is in effect, a justification to say that "black lives don't matter to me". That's what people were implying in their rhetoric. And that's why "Black Lives Matter" is the phrase that is needed because the reality is that to many people they do NOT matter and that's why not only do the police kill us, but that's why society ALLOWS THEM TO.

"Police Kill Too Many People—White and Black"

I agree with this, however, keep in mind that black people are much less of the population and no other group is targeted like we are. It's okay to suppress our votes. It's okay to admit that the war on drugs was largely about minorities. It's okay to stop and frisk us. And if you research Michael Wood you'll find out why he's my favorite (retired) police officer. He exposed a lot of institutional racism in policing and he's deadly honest about it. But the bottom line is that this is NOT THE SAME ISSUE. Trying to make it the same issue is missing the point.

maybe this is true but can you prove it? do you have some evidence other than your intuition?
mostly what i see these days is people going from the military to police force after they get back from the wars... then acting towards citizens with the same mindset that they had towards the iraqis: that of an occupying force.

I hate the way police are starting to get more military equipment. I don't want to live in a police state. But, there's no organization that I know of that is actively fighting this issue. If there was I would support it with donations. But the fact that it doesn't exist (to my knowledge) doesn't mean I can take another organization and criticize them for not being for my other issue. They are focused on their issue. Why shouldn't I hinder them unless I have a problem with their issue? We can't all focus on the same issue no more than we can all get the same college degree and work in the same field.

Proving it is the problem. We struggle to even prove that a white cop killing an unarmed black man has committed murder. Most of the time they get off scott free just like George Zimmerman who later proved that he was definitely the one who was more dangerous. Why? Because how do you get the proof? Who's responsible for getting the the proof? Who conducts investigations? You want the cops to police the cops? What about prosecutors? Judges? They're all friends. They don't want to go after each other. We could have a cop caught red handed (like Mark Furhman) and later he'll become a contributor for Fox News. But use your common sense. KKK members don't hang people so much now but often back in the day the Sheriff was a member of the klan. They had to wear hoods to protect their identities, not just from the police, but from the citizens knowing that they were police. These days, the only job in America that lets you beat, detain, fine, hasstle, lock up, take away their right to vote, and force into a condition that will burden their families, make them unhirable to many jobs, and affect their entire socio-economic future, is the job of Police Officer. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that job will attract a lot of racists.

the same can be said for almost all cases of whites being killed by police... but not only does BLM ignore the full scope of police brutality, to make it even worse they seem to only want to riot and set things on fire when the cops kill someone who was asking for it- yes, asking for it.

Again... BLM is not about "police brutality". That is a misunderstanding and mischaracterization. BLM was always about the RACISM that is the source of racially motivated police brutality against black people. So yes, "police brutality" is an issue. But you can't force a different issue on someone else just because you don't like theirs. Again, I don't have to save black bears at the same time I'm saving polar bears. If black bears are endangered its not the same issue endangering polar bears. The solution for polar bears is not the same solution for black bears. Does that make sense?

No one who is unarmed is "really" asking for it. Furthermore, black people aren't in positions to report on the amount of whites getting killed by police. I'm sorry this happens too. I think PTSD does affect a lot of cops and they are more likely to shoot, in general, and even if they target more black people that doesn't mean whites wont get shot too. But no one is saying cops don't shoot whites. And ignoring it means that someone is bringing it to our attention and we don't care. The only reason it is brought to the attention of BLM and its supporters is to COUNTER the message and diminish what is happening to black people. I personally know and witnessed a case in which my local police department was forced to arrest a young black man who I knew and they did a fantastic job even though he was literally telling them to shoot him. Why? Because he has mental health issues and doesn't take his medicine and he's so influenced by a history of distrust of police and police killing young black men that now its part of his reaction. "You want to kill me? Then do it." Sometimes it's called defiance. That doesn't mean the person should be shot. Most police shoot out of fear or they just say they do in order to get away with it. In the same situations one cop shoots another cop in the same situation is somehow magically able to disarm the suspect. And when there are 2-5 cops on one person there's not excuse when they are the ones with the weapons and the training. The problem is that they're trained to shoot if there is ANY threat. That's why Texas police officer pulled his gun out on kids at a swimming party. But always, people who are against BLM hide behind cases in which they believe killing the person was the right move. Why? Because that's what they would have done. Of course you may not even see where someone in police custody reacts in a dangerous why because THEY believe their life is at stake. They're the only ones not allowed to be afraid and not allowed to act out of fear. And some have proved even when we're perfectly calm and we say "I have a gun because I'm licensed to carry"... still get shot. A lot of black people run from the police because they literally fear for their lives. This is not something most whites understand.

well this could be true but again, any evidence besides rumor and intuition?

http://www.snopes.com/the-origins-of-policing-in-the-united-states/
Snopes fact checked this and couldn't say it was false.

also. From the Encyclopedia of US Labor and Working-class history

"All law enforcement officials were obligated to arrest anyone even suspected of being a runaway slave, often on very little evidence."

I also have the testimony of someone I grew up with who was homeless and he said sometimes the cops would beat him. In no way am I saying "ALL COPS ARE RACIST". That's not the point. The point is that it happens enough to be a huge problem for us. I have had a run in or two myself that I feel could have been racial but I don't jump to conclusions just because a situation doesn't seem fair. But hell, if we could prove it, I guess that would be the answer, right? Evidence makes it sound so simple and it's not. Especially when you're dealing with people who handle evidence professionally, its not going to be easy to prove your case; especially when they can present "alternative facts" or use their partner as testimony that you're lying.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-komorn/5-cops-busted-lying-on-the-stand_b_5229900.html

This is just one example as to why it society supports the cops over the suspects. Imagine a time before video and dash cams. You think they lied less? White weren't simply the ones who arrested us. They were the ones who controlled the media and the narrative. If a white woman says she was raped by a black man it often led to a white riot and lynchings. One of the most famous cases of this was Black Wall Street in Tulsa. You should really read about this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race_riot

Nothing at any BLM rally, march, or other form of protest comes anywhere close to this. And under no circumstances are those perptrating these acts of violence or destruction representatives of BLM. That's the problem of having PUBLIC events where any member of the public can participate. Even if you asked on a form or application, no one's going to tick the box that says "Yes, I do intend on starting a riot or destroying property". ALL protests run the risk of being hijacked depending on where they happen.

im on the side that says "all bigotry is bad no matter who it is coming from and no matter who it is directed towards. people should be judged as individuals not by their group associations"

That's not a third side. That's the BLM side. Because no representative of BLM has ever said bigotry is fine so long as its not us. And you cannot make that assumption on their behalf without at least polling a cross section of their organizers. The problem is that racists make criticisms against BLM that makes this sound like they're saying something wrong. People twist their words or put words in their mouths because BLM doesn't have a media channel where they can respond to every criticism and control their own narrative. They can't do that. They don't have the resources to litigate the correct philosophy driving BLM against all of the opponents who have time and money to invest hours of TV programming into denouncing and rebranding BLM as a terrorist organization.

because we have a legal system that is predicated on the rule that we dont murder each other. i understand that the BLM position is that cops are murdering blacks, but once you decide that violence is a legitimate tool in your tool kit, youve transitioned into being a terrorist organization.
neither of us want the state to decide that it has the justification to declare martial law and thats the kindof outcome youre going to get.

Do I want violence? Of course not. But if the entity, hear me out, that is the proponent of violence or war against your people... if that entity that is the threat, IS the legal entity... then you will always have violent AND non-violent protests and you will always have a narrative that is controlled by the legal system to call those people terrorists while to the people they're fighting for, they may be "freedom fighters". Case in point, who were the "terrorists" that led the way to the American Revolution? Did the colonies create the United States without any violence? Did they not have a legal system that stood in opposition to what they wanted to change? What could that legal system have done to keep them happy? Is the non-violent perpetual existence of the legal entity the absolute goal? Or is progress the goal?

Kobos wrote:

ZealotX wrote: You asked where does the teaching/reforming/healing/etc. begin? Depending on where YOU are, YOU, by virtue of being different, change racism and the form it takes. Black people cannot solve this problem because it is self replicated in white culture. Let me give you a real example of something I personally experienced this spring.


A little white kid said something about my fiance's son being black and "white people are better".

I could have reacted but I held my peace. The white kid said this, not just in front of him, but in front of me and in front of his father. We were all within 5 feet of this. His father said nothing; offered nothing in the way of any apology, nor did I expect one because clearly that's most likely where he got it from. And if there was any correction, we didn't see it and it was after the fact and probably had more to do with saying it in front of us.

I would love for my children (my fiance's son is only 12) to grow up in a world without this perverse way of thinking but nothing I could say would have changed that kid's mind because that was parental authority being passed down. It was part of that child's culture just as much as the English language. So what am I supposed to do? What can I do? I can only tell you my story in hopes that your ears aren't deaf and hope that you have greater influence over kids like that than I, "the inferior one", could have. It has to come from white people.

Absolutely not. But I cannot prevent them from forming negative feelings if they have consistently bad interactions with them. Fortunately mine don't and they have all had/have white friends who I assume don't treat them as inferior.

The solution could only be the influence of black people getting the attention of white people so that white people use their influence to get the attention of the white people who are programmed not to listen to us and who don't care about us, to those to whom our lives truly do not matter, and influence them towards change or be a light for their children to show them that not all white people think they are superior to other humans and that what you own, or your socio-economic status, doesn't make you superior. I probably make more than that kid's father, but does it matter? At all? Absolutely not. Before BLM most black-white interactions were superficial because they did not deal with racial issues. So even if you think a black person is your friend, if they're not cool enough with you to talk about race, it's possible that they don't trust you that far based on a history of whites who didn't want to talk about it because they didn't care enough to or just wish the topic would just go away even though the effects of it are alive and well.

We say black lives matter only because, to some, we know they don't. Even if you believe saying ALL LIVES MATTER accomplishes the same thing; it doesn't. Because the fact that it was created to COUNTER the statement that black lives matter, means that it is designed to ignore, specifically, black lives as a racial group being actively and systematically oppressed. ALL LIVES are not being oppressed based on race. White men in suits are not stopped and frisked. There are no establishments that deny whites entry or service because you wear clothes thought to be part of white culture. No one shoots you because you're wearing a hoodie or playing loud music. ALL LIVES aren't faced with the same issues for the same reasons. And the statistics for UNARMED police shootings is evidence of this.

The Solutions of BLM are mostly related to policing. They have successfully pushed for policy changes and as a result more police are using body cams and there's more community oversight. These policy changes benefit white people too. So what it's called Black Lives Matter? What's the difference between us saying it and having to fill out "Black" or "African American" on application forms and documents? We don't know how that's being used. What we do know is when we give our children names that sound more "white" than "black" they have an easier time getting jobs. It's been proven. What's the solution? Again... influence. The best thing I can do is raise the level of consciousness around me and try to make other black people better - whom I have greater influence over, and hope that something I say in the presence of whites is able to cause one of you to say something different, do something different, to lessen the effect or hinder the reproduction of racism.

I wanted to take the time to hank you for the well thought out answer. I also appreciate the flattery, it does however, suck that I am considered different though as I'm simply being empathetic towards another human experience, but it simply came from doing something you mentioned in another post. I had a deep long conversation with my roommate (he was obviously black and also from the South Side of Chicago) in college about race. Interestingly enough it came from a discussion on a vibe I picked up from some gentlemen who came over to get green. I could tell they were unsavory to say the least, for perspective I spent a good amount of time selling (I do not anymore but everyone was young and only green, no other drugs), that means exposure to a different set of principles to judge upon. Criminals shouldn't really judge criminals but it becomes a safety issue when money and other stuff is involved. My assumption was right; but we had a deep conversation about what caused my predisposition in that situation. He decided my concern was founded in logic, but he also shared some experiences and ways of looking at racism I didn't really think of from my perspective along the way. "It's not the overt S$3T that get's to me, it's the subtle stuff that bothers me, like someone not meeting a gaze or someone assuming my course of action without relation." That was his statement was an eye opener. The assumption of socio-economic status by race is an example.

I applaud your temperance in the scenario above, I would have had a serious talk with my child about any statement like that (It was how I was raised). I run into stuff like this more than I would like to say, particularly, working in a suburban high-school setting. However, though I'm not the parent, so beyond letting them know they don't understand the experience and that maybe they should look a little open minded, or that they are just being stupid my influence on them is limited. However, influence I have to use none the less. I agree though that the solution does in a way start with me but in general it starts with all of us. We each have a role to play here and each of our actions should and need share a general attachment to one another. I can and have reached to those around me about racism it is the minimum I can do. I agree that the movement cannot police the whole of itself it is not possible in an movement/organization after certain size. However, word of mouth particularly now with social media holds a new power, so any uncultivated action by those in leadership (tend to be positive statements) and those not (the less positive ones that are very popularly thrown around) can be devistating or incredibly up lifting. With this in mind I think we need to look at why the most shocking and ignorant statements tend to sway public opinion and how to make that shift; that and education both in general and on different cultural perspective are where we can start in my opinion.

This dialogue here, though I am sure frustrating and painful to some, is incredibly important to keep going while it maintains its course of civil dialog with presentation of at least path ways to solutions. I appreciate the peacefulness of this thread and hope it continues; the more perspectives we each strive to understand the better. just never try to understand a perspective from your perspective, objectivity is key or you will become judgmental of given situation (history major in college.....) Thank you everyone for your contributions please keep it peaceful. Adder thanks for your contribution I think it helps to see an outside the US (it also, makes us define , think and consider the simpler parts of the dialog in the US (we don't tend to do this much in the US on issues that are difficult), when most the time we are arguing finer points with fervent passion) perspective on this too. This will not be without effect on emotions but the community will be better served by temperance here than flaring tempers (steps off soap box, takes soap box, burns soap box, realizes he's an a-hole for standing on it, then wonders how he got a wood soap box these days in the first place.)

In Peace and Respect,
Tim

It does kind of suck that you're different, but in the same way that whites have different experiences from black people, you've had experiences with black people that many other whites haven't had. This is often taken for granted. I think that MLK's dream involved all of our children playing together because he knew that those children would grow up with a new and different perspective and having spent that time together, they would have a deeper understanding and stronger connection. I don't blame white people (generally speaking) for being manipulated by the political spin that is designed to attack BLM and cause them to misunderstand what it's about. Part of understanding each other has to be understanding there is good and bad on both sides.

During the height of BLM I was on a couple of different conference calls where different people were trying to organize protests and figure out "what we should do". I say this in all seriousness. The majority of black people have no idea how to solve these problems so there is a element of desperation. When you're desperate any chick at the bar starts looking like a supermodel after awhile. The easiest ideas take the least thought and the least coordination and are the least complex. My solution to them is always economic because there is a certain level of responsibility that black people have even when it comes to racism. It's true that we often have to be twice as good as the competition in order to make it. And because a minority of us will always be exceptional there will always be success stories even at the height of racism. But it is the lack of economic power that means the most exceptional are not creating jobs for the least. Too many of our people are selling drugs (although its mostly weed) just to survive because of a lack of economic opportunity. Economic solutions are not simple because it is extremely difficult for black people in general to get money from white institutions. But I digress. The people in my community who have the ideas are usually not the people who have time or the people who have money. It is only when these 3 things connect that something positive comes as a result. Because I was involved in a positive movement I was more vocal about what I believed were the right solutions. But instead of our two communities reacting to each other's negativity we need to react to each other's positivity. But being on these phone calls, there were always individuals who talked about fighting and they always seemed to be trying to hijack the call away from the organizers. It got to the point where myself and a friend of mine who was heavily involved in economic solutions more from an relationship with Africa perspective, we were calling these people out and nullifying their potential influence. My friend was even of the belief that they weren't real; that they had been kind of sent to disrupt. Had it not been a conference call and instead been a live protest I can see how organizers could easily be overpowered or have their platform hijacked. Even Bernie Sanders (in a move I didn't agree with) had his podium hijacked by those two women representing BLM. He wasn't threatened by it so he allowed it to happen, but still he took heat for it.

Unlike my friend, I do believe those people were real. They were hurt, angry, and frustrated. When the twin towers fell in 2011 people were hurt, angry, and frustrated and they wanted to fight. What people generally ignore is WHY. They don't see everyone being targeted and killed, even unarmed, by the state they pay taxes to. They only see themselves being victimized by racists cops who they're not even allowed to fight back against. Hurt. Angry. Frustrated. I am thankful that I am nearly immune to emotionalism. Because I understand them, even though I cannot agree with all of their actions. One thing is true, we can't become the very thing we're fighting against. That's when that thing has won. People who are hurt, angry, and frustrated, don't mind the irrationality of it all that turns them into terrorists. They don't need you or I to understand their reasons or motivations. They simply feel like you haven't listened to peaceful talk so maybe you'll hear this___(insert wrong thing here)___. Usually, that wrong thing is to do to them what they do to you in an effort to show them how it feels. I think that is essentially what Terrorism is and why it wont end as long as all we do is fight it (and especially by fighting it in a way that kills innocent civilians).

When human beings don't listen we fight. And it's sad. I don't want to fight. Most of us don't want to fight. We just want to be heard because we feel like we're being fought. It's like a war that Congress never agreed to and therefore has plausible deniability and no responsibility. There are so many black people that feel like there is already a war against them you would be amazed. And then you'd be stuck in the Matrix wondering whether or not to believe us or whether we are all insane. It's one of the reasons why we're careful who we even tell our history to because you never know if that person is Neo or if that person is an agent Smith. And again... that's why these conversations are unusual. Your black friend was a true friend because he allowed your relationship to reach beyond that surface level of which we're typically all cordial and friendly with each other regardless of race. I think the truth is that we know that racism creates sides. One side is right and the other is wrong and what's right to one could be wrong to the other and "do I really want to know if my 'friend' isn't really on my side?" Maybe I'd rather not risk that and not even have that conversation. Maybe my friend might think I was asking them to choose sides since that's how a lot of white people take it.

That's interesting to me. When race is brought up it is amazing how many people get offended who claim not to be racists; just like the young man in the video in the original post. We hear it often. "I'm not a racist BUT..." Why? Why do they get offended? This is an assumption but I'm going to put it out there. The ideas they express don't sound like they've had a private conversation with a black person. So why is their first conversation in the public sphere? But they're not racists though. They either can't see the issue from the black perspective or they can't see the issue from a completely unbiased perspective because they can't help but see themselves as "white" in comparison to an issue that is "black". And for some reason this is different from feminism or gay rights where you don't have to be a female or a homosexual to support their basic human rights or legal status. It seems to some of us like it is more permissible to be homosexual than it is to be black. And the gay rights movement was probably the most perfect most successful protest movement in American history. But because anyone from any socio-economic class could be homosexual it also had a lot of advantages. The one advantage of being black is a lot of white women secretly suspect you're packing. Even with the advantages and the near flawless execution there was plenty of opposition to the Gay Rights movement. So I guess my point is that there was almost no possibility that no matter what they did, BLM was inevitably going to get attacked.

Solutions, solutions. The solution is having the conversation so that we can keep coming up with solutions and so we can keep understanding the problem and our place in it. It is my belief that BLM was never perfect and never above making mistakes but as long as we see BLM as a negative thing our opinion is going to be manipulated and controlled by racists who don't care about black lives and don't want to change anything that would help black people. This doesn't sound right and doesn't make sense in this day and age since we all know that, by now, we should be past racism. However, we're not. Too many of us are afraid of the conversation because we're either afraid to be thought of as racists or afraid to uncover racists in the people we want to like and have relationships with. But we have to get over these fears and figure out how we can help each other.

ZealotX wrote:

ren wrote: My wife is black my kids are tanned, I have every reason in the world to want an end to BLM, they are a threat to my family's continued existence. BLM's "me me me but not you" approach only serves to create enemies they once did not have.

unfortunately, this is proof of what I was saying about ALL LIVES MATTER being a skillful political attack against the movement.

BLM is not in any way a threat to you or your family. You've been lied to by those who were already enemies of BLM before the organization ever existed.

I don't make projections on the basis of opinions, sooo... no.