"Black Lives Matter" - it's stupid. Just cut the crap.....

[JimMIA]

We were discussing why it does or doesn't make sense to use the argument that if BLM doesn't address black on black crime then they are insincere.

I don't think that the lack of emphasis on ALL crime affecting the black community is a legitimate reason to feel that BLM is insincere. I think that criticism is a natural response to their catchy, but very poorly-descriptive, name.

But what does make me wonder how sincere they are two things:

• Their lack of an effective strategy to try to correct what they believe is a pattern of excessive use of force by police against black people.
  • Protests alone are neither effective, nor are they a strategy. Protests are not even an attempt to really address a problem with sensible solutions that might actually work.
  • Protests and "community meetings" are, however, easy to organize and quite profitable -- see Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson's pioneering work in this field.
  • There are effective, proven strategies for addressing real police misconduct -- and it does actually exist. There are dozens of cities (including Dallas, incidentally) who have been effectively improving things for many years. Those strategies are not hard to find -- I gave you several of them about 20 pages back. BLM makes no attempt to do things that might actually work. That makes me wonder if they really want things to work.
• Their tolerance for violence as part and parcel of their demonstrations. No, they don't promote violence -- they'd go to jail for that. But, at a minimum, they look the other way...and probably chuckle in many cases. The near riots in the Minneapolis area are a good example, and of course Ferguson and Baltimore are classics.

 

[agame2323]

CNN has a town hall meeting on right now. Very powerful messages. I suggest all watch.

 

["Got Disney"]

BLM needs to clean up their acts if they are to be taken seriously....for me they are just a bunch of people that are anarchists....the days of Martin Luther King who my mom marched with are gone....and these young BLM protesters have no idea what Martin Luther King really marched for....and the real difference he made....unlike this group that wants to stir up trouble...

Mind you I'm not talking about all the protesters...just the BLM protesters.

 

[bcla]

That was an interesting miscue.

It's interesting . . . Lynx play in Minneapolis and their best player is from Baton Rouge. No surprise that those events were important to them. The shirt also included the several Dallas police departments.

I'm pleased the Chief spoke out against their behavior.

Not necessarily singling out your post, but I wanted something to link to the Minneapolis situation. Here's something similar, but with considerably higher profile personalities.

http://espn.go.com/espys/2016/story...ade-lebron-james-call-athletes-promote-change

If anyone was offended, I hope the off-duty law enforcement working the venue didn't walk out. I checked the LAPD policy, and it seems like an officer could be reprimanded for doing something that "brings discredit to the department".

 

[mummabear]

http://i.stuff.co.nz/world/americas...atal-shooting-of-unarmed-teenager-Dylan-Noble

Interesting article in that its an unarmed white man getting shot, for not complying with police instructions.

This is what some have been saying on this thread, as far as the shootings (not the pulling over etc) it's the actions not the skin colour getting them shot

 

[kamik86]

I somewhat agree with what your saying, But if I said statistically white people are more racist, would you agree because there is a trend in this country of white people displaying racism towards minorities way more than any other race in this country.

Well yes if you define racism as only being towards minorities then saying that any majority group is more racist would be true, since people in general are only racist towards other races.

However one thing that has always annoyed me is the idea that racism only goes one way. You hear the term reverse racism... sorry that doesn't exist its still just racism. If a black person hates me because I'm white he is just as racist as if I hate him for being black.

If we define racism that way I'm not sure that it is true that whites are more racist on a whole. At least not outwardly so since most of us have the luxury of race not affecting our every day lives and thus not haivng to think about it.

 

[kamik86]

If you said statistically that any race was more racist than any other race, I would want to see your actual statistics -- not "It's been said that..." -- actual statistics. Mere references that someone has complained about anything does not mean that thing is true.

So if this comment is actually serious (which I doubt), please provide those statistics.

The only thing I remember that said anything like this was a study done by some students using twitter and facebook posts to determine what areas are most racist (looking for racist terms etc in posts).

They found that cities that you would think our more diverse and less racist showed worse, where the middle of the country bible belt areas and southern areas that seem to be known to be racist were less.

However people immediately poked alot of holes in that theory the two I immediately remember are:
1) I wouldn't expect my area came up high using this statistic given that we are 94% white. You can go about mutliple days and never see a person of another race. So I would expect it wasn't on the forefront of peoples minds to tweet and write posts about reguardless of their feelings.
2) They had no filter for what race the person saying terms was or the context. It wouldn't be hard for me to make a non racist comment that some not very smart software may flag as being racist.

 

[disneyjunkie]

Really? If you see someone driving down the street in a beat up 1995 Chevy, you don't make an assumption about their income? Or in a brand-new Lexus SUV?

No I do not. I see people living in public housing driving expensive cars. I also see people purchasing million dollar brownstones here is Brooklyn driving beat up cars. Hell, many of them do not own cars at all, they use public transportation.


I've seen posts by DISer receiving public assistance (foodstamps, WiC...)posting about awesome trips to Disney world. (Deluxe resorts, deluxe dining plan, tickets to the Halloween party.....).

So no, I don't make assumptions about a person's income based on where they live, how they dress, what they drive, where/how often they vacation......

 

[Gracie09]

No I do not. I see people living in public housing driving expensive cars. I also see people purchasing million dollar brownstones here is Brooklyn driving beat up cars. Hell, many of them do not own cars at all, they use public transportation.


I've seen posts by DISer receiving public assistance (foodstamps, WiC...)posting about awesome trips to Disney world. (Deluxe resorts, deluxe dining plan, tickets to the Halloween party.....).

So no, I don't make assumptions about a person's income based on where they live, how they dress, what they drive, where/how often they vacation......

My dad drove a beater for years. It even was so rusted it had a hole in the floor. It was his station car for when he commuted. At the time he was making six-figures but why buy a nice car to have to sit in a train station all week.

 

[design_mom]

However one thing that has always annoyed me is the idea that racism only goes one way. You hear the term reverse racism... sorry that doesn't exist its still just racism. If a black person hates me because I'm white he is just as racist as if I hate him for being black.

From how I understand it, racism (as opposed to prejudice or bigotry) has to begin from a position of power. Since whites, as a group, have the most social power in the US, only they can be "racist." A minority can be prejudiced or bigoted, but not racist since they don't hold the most power.

I guess I can understand that when talking about institutionalized racism, etc. However, I'm not sure how it applies in more personal situations. There are situations where black people have the position of power in a relationship (black supervisor over white employee, etc.). If that supervisor made race-based assumptions that affected the work relationship, would that be considered racism (since the supervisor has the power in the relationship), or still not?

 

[MichaelWill&Megan'sMom]

So many of the posts in this thread break my heart. It is nearly impossible not notice the differences in how different racial groups are treated by law enforcement. I do not fear being pulled over because I don't know any other white people who have been mistreated, without just cause such as a DUI, during a traffic stop. But I have plenty of black friends who have been pulled over on suspicion of wrongdoing - one forced to give her social security number to check for felonies! What?!?!? She was on her way to take her medical boards - not fleeing a crime or driving drunk. Her only crime - driving while black.
There is a clear problem. Hopefully we are on the right track to start fixing it! We can't believe it doesn't exist because white people don't experience it.

 

[sunshinehighway]

From how I understand it, racism (as opposed to prejudice or bigotry) has to begin from a position of power. Since whites, as a group, have the most social power in the US, only they can be "racist." A minority can be prejudiced or bigoted, but not racist since they don't hold the most power.

I guess I can understand that when talking about institutionalized racism, etc. However, I'm not sure how it applies in more personal situations. There are situations where black people have the position of power in a relationship (black supervisor over white employee, etc.). If that supervisor made race-based assumptions that affected the work relationship, would that be considered racism (since the supervisor has the power in the relationship), or still not?

I think, it's a bit of semantics to say only white people can be racists or that x race can't be racist. Yeah if we're talking instutional racism. I'd say many white people hear racism and they think more along the lines of not liking a different race or discriminating against a different race. That makes it confusing because there are clearly people who don't like white people.
Maybe that's part of the problem.
There's a bit of difference from conscious individual racism ( what many think,of when they hear racism) and systemic or institutional racism ( especial subconscious).

 

[asta]

From how I understand it, racism (as opposed to prejudice or bigotry) has to begin from a position of power. Since whites, as a group, have the most social power in the US, only they can be "racist." A minority can be prejudiced or bigoted, but not racist since they don't hold the most power.

I guess I can understand that when talking about institutionalized racism, etc. However, I'm not sure how it applies in more personal situations. There are situations where black people have the position of power in a relationship (black supervisor over white employee, etc.). If that supervisor made race-based assumptions that affected the work relationship, would that be considered racism (since the supervisor has the power in the relationship), or still not?

But demonstrating to the point that you shut streets down or committing violence is a crude way of exerting power.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

From how I understand it, racism (as opposed to prejudice or bigotry) has to begin from a position of power. Since whites, as a group, have the most social power in the US, only they can be "racist." A minority can be prejudiced or bigoted, but not racist since they don't hold the most power.

I guess I can understand that when talking about institutionalized racism, etc. However, I'm not sure how it applies in more personal situations. There are situations where black people have the position of power in a relationship (black supervisor over white employee, etc.). If that supervisor made race-based assumptions that affected the work relationship, would that be considered racism (since the supervisor has the power in the relationship), or still not?

Bigotry comes in many forms. You can be bigoted toward color, income level, body type, education level, nationality, religion, or any number of things.

Racism is simply a form of bigotry based upon race and it applies regardless of position of power (or lack thereof).

Now, if we want to come up with some new term that applies to those who benefit from or suffer the consequences of racism, that's fine. But, it's not just "racism".

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

President Obama acknowledged that the murder of the five Dallas police officers was a racist act. I think he got it right.

Precise language from the memorial service: "Then the targeting of police by the shooter here, an act not just of demented violence, but of racial hatred."

 

[Mikie]

But even that is an oversimplification of a chicken-and-egg problem. Study after study has shown similar rates of drug use, shoplifting, and other petty crimes between black and white youth populations, but the rate of prosecutions and convictions for these offenses is much, much higher for young black men than for their white counterparts. That is then used to justify the higher level of police scrutiny directed towards young blacks which in turn supports the higher rate of criminal justice involvement in the youthful mistakes of black teens/young adults. And on and on it goes.

Strangely enough, we mostly self-segregated among class and educational lines. The kids who were clearly bound for college and who mostly were middle-class hung together whether we were white, black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. However, we got a lesson in the real world. The poorer black kids were often racist towards the white and Asian kids. The poorer black kids also didn't get along with the middle-class black kids. I saw plenty of it, and no one group failed to have members who I would consider racist towards other groups.

I was struck by these comments. I lean toward thinking that level of punishment may have plenty to do with financial means, maybe moreso than race, but that black and brown teens/young adults are disproportionately poorer, leading to this result. While it still means there is a problem to be addressed in our country regarding race and everyone's opportunity for personal success, it's important to correctly identify the problem: are blacks receiving more stringent punishments because they are black or because they are poorer? I definitely think it's possible that the white criminals are getting lighter sentences because daddy pays a lawyer, rather than a belief that the white kid should simply serve less time due to his skin color.

The lack of fairness on this is definitely not lost on me, however, to me it compares to a child who says "why did I get in trouble?? Johnny was talking in class too!!" To which I would say "TOO? You were talking and Johnny was talking TOO?" So, you know you did wrong and your big defense was "Johnny did it TOO?"

If someone wants to start a movement in which they march and protest the RELEASE of criminals (of any color) who only served a tiny fraction of their time, or to protest plea deals that allow violent criminals of any race to avoid jail, let me get my marching shoes and come join you immediately! However, I cannot comprehend the argument that a black youth did something against the law (robbery, assault, traffic violations, etc) and shouldn't be arrested or charged because "it wasn't a really BAD crime" or "the white kid he was with did it TOO".

 

[bcla]

I was struck by these comments. I lean toward thinking that level of punishment may have plenty to do with financial means, maybe moreso than race, but that black and brown teens/young adults are disproportionately poorer, leading to this result. While it still means there is a problem to be addressed in our country regarding race and everyone's opportunity for personal success, it's important to correctly identify the problem: are blacks receiving more stringent punishments because they are black or because they are poorer? I definitely think it's possible that the white criminals are getting lighter sentences because daddy pays a lawyer, rather than a belief that the white kid should simply serve less time due to his skin color.

The lack of fairness on this is definitely not lost on me, however, to me it compares to a child who says "why did I get in trouble?? Johnny was talking in class too!!" To which I would say "TOO? You were talking and Johnny was talking TOO?" So, you know you did wrong and your big defense was "Johnny did it TOO?"

If someone wants to start a movement in which they march and protest the RELEASE of criminals (of any color) who only served a tiny fraction of their time, or to protest plea deals that allow violent criminals of any race to avoid jail, let me get my marching shoes and come join you immediately! However, I cannot comprehend the argument that a black youth did something against the law (robbery, assault, traffic violations, etc) and shouldn't be arrested or charged because "it wasn't a really BAD crime" or "the white kid he was with did it TOO".

I for one believe there's a problem if disparate punishment for similar crimes is based on race and/or financial means. It's not just the unfairness, but that certain people who receive lesser punishments may think they can get away with repeating those crimes.

 

[CPanther95]

As long as lawyers are free to charge for their services what those services are worth on the open market, those with more money will be able to afford better representation.

 

[Disn3yVision]

I am enjoying your contributions to this thread and appreciate and agree with much of what you have written. I just have to comment on this specific bolded phrase above. They are prejudices if you assume characteristics about someone based on their skin color or some other superficial characteristic rather than on specific evidence. They are observable facts if you're talking about actions you've seen particular individuals take. SOME folks within the BLM movement or invading it (sorry, indistinguishable to an observer without a lot of research) use violent, dismissive, aggressive, rowdy, criminal tactics to try to advance their cause. It is difficult, if not impossible, to have any conversation or resolution with people behaving in this way.

As others before me have stated more eloquently, BLM sentiment is admirable, but the execution of tactics of many people within or attached to the movement exactly perpetuates/exacerbates the stereotypes you list above. How can someone scream "STOP stereotyping and accusing me of being LOUD and violent!" while throwing a Molotov cocktail at a police officer and honestly expect this to help advance any kind of solution?

Prior to reading this thread, I would describe myself as anti-BLM because of TACTICS, not because of SENTIMENT. I have been enlightened by a lot of the discussion and appreciate peoples' reasoned discussions. I am more likely to want to listen to calm, rational discussion of those who identify themselves with BLM instead of dismissing them out of hand as soon as the BLM title is evoked. I hope that more people genuinely interested in advancing the cause and solutions will try to understand why sharing the BLM umbrella with the violent protestors is completely counter-productive.

Hello Mikie, and thank you for your response. I understand that all prejudices start from somewhere, and that they are not simply made up constructs based on no truth whatsoever. There are a significant amount of black people that often act in ways that could be described with the adjectives I used, and that is an issue that black people are aware we need to address and slowly are. The black community is fully aware of black on black violence. We feel it every day. We see the stereotypes reinforced by our music and our representations in almost every form of media... but we are working to change that and will continue to. At the same time, one could also attribute the african american street culture to a variety of factors which have suppressed blacks, starting them at a place below human just a few short generations ago and not allowing them fair opportunities to rise up since. Zoning laws and unfair employment and lack of education opportunities that barely go back a single generation. Our grandparents lived through that, and in some ways still do. It is a chicken and the egg thing... except for that slavery came first and we have painstakingly been clawing our way up from there ever since. I also might add that is was with slavery that many of those first prejudices were introduced and solidified, and pretty much all have stuck. Have some black people embraced them? Maybe.... But many have also fought damn hard against them, and is it not both the burdened and those that placed the burden's responsibility to help remove it? We can not do it alone.

In regards to your perception of the BLM movement, once again I think it comes down to a matter of perspective. There are people of all types that embrace the BLM movements and its sentiments. I am one of them. Sure, a lot of us are angry and frustrated and sad and tired... but the overwhelming majority of us are peaceful, law abiding citizens trying to promote positive change. Sure there are a few bad apples as many PP's have said, but you can't project that onto the whole bunch. Especially when those few bad apples get a disproportionate amount of media coverage. You say "many" people in the movement are being "LOUD and violent" while I think the reality is that VERY FEW people are. You can choose to focus on the negative of BLM if you want, but that is a small minority. It is also not very productive. BLM has been very vocal about not being violent and completely against retaliation. Pretty much every leader of the black community came out IMMEDIATELY and condemned the killer of those innocent police officers... Google what The Game is doing, Snoop Dogg, Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, Beyonce, etc. They are trying to affect positive change, not incite violence. But instead of seeing that, people choose to believe all this propaganda and media that BLM wants to kill more police and promote more violence. Propaganda such as implying there members out the movement are out there throwing molotov cocktails. That is very strong imagery you are using there and I think it says something that those are the words and actions you would use to describe your perception of the movement. I do thank you though for taking the time to have a reasonable conversation.

LASTLY, I HAVE A QUESTION. HAVE YOU OR ANYBODY HERE EVER EVEN TAKEN THE TIME TO READ THE BLM WEBSITE??? It addresses 99% of the arguments I have seen on this thread, including yours. You can get the information right from the horses mouth, or you can continue to believe what you see on Fox News. Either way at least take the time to look at it and listen to what they have to say for themselves.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

 

[CPanther95]

LASTLY, I HAVE A QUESTION, HAVE YOU OR ANYBODY HERE TAKEN THE TIME TO READ THE BLM WEBSITE??? It addresses 99% of the arguments I have seen on this thread, including yours. You can get the information right from the horses mouth, or you can continue to believe what you see on Fox News. Either way at least take the time to look at it.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

I have - and as long as they promote things such as the quote below, I won't be taking anything they say or do as a serious attempt to find real solutions:

"No matter how Wilson and Brown confronted each other, Brown was shot several times, including in the head. He was not wrestled to the ground or Tasered. In a matter of seconds, Brown was viewed expendable enough to shoot and kill."

http://blacklivesmatter.com/ferguso...esters-were-right-to-fight-for-mike-brown-jr/