Something doesn't feel right about BLM
- Thread starter HoneyBee
- Start date
You say "good point", agreeing that you should read the thread, and then still haven't read it, or are at least pretending you haven't. I've given several "Marxist components" stated by BLM. Really not much point in talking if you're going to ignore me. You should really put down the steaming absinthe when interacting on web forums.
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
Surely you're aware that people die...right?
Somewhere today, someone will die because of a dr's error...in this country. There's probably no accountability involved...
Are you going to burn things down, march, and protest about it? No.
I'd like to think that it's because you understand that despite mistakes, laziness, arrogance, or even maliciousness...they ultimately do far more good than bad.
Upvote
0
So they are ideologically opposed to themselves? This is a really lame attempt at gaslighting me. You even gaslighted (gaslit?) yourself when you said they don't claim to want to abolish the family, then included a link where they say they do, in the same post!
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
It's not an insult, it's reality. It's not a good thing, it's not a bad thing, it just is.
You ever hear the phrase "perfect is the enemy of good"?
You'll never have a perfect police force.
If police have to defend themselves with deadly force 1000 times a year, usually in a split second decision, and they only fail or are wrong 50 times....that's actually really really good.
Being arrested puts them in "fight or flight mode".
Why??? I thought that was obvious. It's because some people try to attack or kill police.
Upvote
0
Sorry, but I do not accept that we simply can not change anything to make things better. I have seen to many times were those who claimed that were proven wrong.
I have heard it. I'm not asking for a perfect police force. I'm stating the exact opposite. Let's assume the police force is imperfect and craft policy so it minimizes people dying or being mistreated by the state.
Cool, let's lessen the number of times they have to defend themselves with deadly force and knock the number down further.
Then how about we stop arresting people for traffic infractions?
No kidding. Why do people try to kill police during a traffic stop?
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes I am aware of that. So if someone were to come in and brutally murder a close relative of yours would you be upset? Or would you shrug your shoulders and say "Well, people die every day!"
If an authority whose job description includes "PUBLIC SAFETY" and whose pay I FUND kills someone you better bet I'm going to want to know WHAT HAPPENED. And if what happened means they simply decided to kneel on their neck until the person was dead I'm probably going to get a bit concerned. And if it happens over and over and over and over again, I'm going to probably want that to change.
OF COURSE they do! But we have developed a system in which abuses can become more prevalent. And that's the problem. So it's time to change. Since we couldn't get them to change simply because it's the right thing to do, people got a bit upset. We have put police on the streets who are immune to being fired for cause (police unions are extremely strong) and we've trained them up with "Warrior Training" type approaches and then armed them with surplus MILITARY gear and sent them out on the streets with little in the way of training in how to de-escalate encounters or how to deal effectively with severe mental health crises.
(Hint: that's what the "defund police" movement is about...it's not normally a "let's go without police altogether" it's more "let's put our money into these programs that will help make these potential abuses less likely to happen" approach.)
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Umm, no I said "good point" because it is a fair statement that if I want to know something you have already posted I should go look for it myself. But as I noted since Marxism isn't really a part of the BLM philosophy as they lay out it really doesn't matter much either way.
Yes, but usually people tend to over-extrapolate what is or isn't Marxism per se. Since I don't really see a significant Marxist component in their philosophy I don't worry that much. But even if one could derive a Marxist influence in any of their statements of interest it wouldn't worry me because the statements they make about themselves seem quite rational and reasonable.
Now, if they said they wish to destroy all capital and devolve the entire system of our economy to control by the proletariat I might be a bit concerned. Or if they said they wanted to create a Leninist-Stalinist type of commune in which political enemies would be destroyed, well then I think I'd be REALLY concerned. But I'm going by what they say they are for. Rather than just my febrile imagination.
Why would I have "steaming absinthe? Wouldn't I use cold water for the louche?
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
People have all sorts of philosophical underpinnings. Doesn't mean EVERYTHING THEY DO is 100% in lockstep with that. I'm an atheist but there's a lot of things I learned from my days as a Christian that I still value and carry with me. Doesn't really make me less of an atheist, does it?
So when BLM explicitly says "We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children." that reads like a desire to abolish the family? Hmmmm.
Now I know you and others have belabored the next paragraph where they say "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other..." but that doesn't mean they want to ABOLISH families...it just appears to mean that they don't think the nuclear family is the ONLY form of support (hence the phrase "prescribed...structure requirement").
It's like saying "We like families but they aren't the ONLY thing that works for everyone. We can work together as a community to support each other". And that, frankly, doesn't sound too awful to me.
Of course you'll probably see "COLLECTIVE" in there somewhere which will set off your "Marxism Radar" but, again, it's not like they are saying "we will force collectivize the proletariat!"
They're basically coming out for good stuff. Kind of the stuff we all want. We want community. We want safe places for our families and children. Don't we? Is that bad?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Well I can't force you to read what I say but it feels strange talking to someone who seems to be only listening and talking to himself.
They do sound internally reasonable for Marxists. They don't sound reasonable for a group who claims to want to do something about the tiny, tiny number of incidences of police brutality against blacks.
Duh. Even Lenin and Stalin didn't say that. I think Pol Pot might have said that, but he was speaking to his small population of people who were already trapped inside the death camp called Cambodia.
Obviously they're going to say that. The nuclear family currently exists, and they want to be as inclusive as possible to get more donations and sell more t-shirts. But do you ever see much in the way of families at their "protests"? I don't. I see a mostly young demographic, with the occasional older mercenary white Democrat politician to whom BLM hands over it's donations.
And the next sentence says "We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work 'double shifts' so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work." Interesting. The statistics show much the opposite of any problem with "patriarchy" in black families. In fact most social scientists think they could use a good deal more of it.
Yes, I see "collective". Obviously you see it too or else you wouldn't have said that. Anyway, again, an odd way to deal with police brutality.
And again, the Soviets didn't come out and say that either. They just did it once they had power.
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
A close relative? Sure. A total stranger? Significantly less. In either case, I'd hope that I have the patience and understanding for the justice system to take its course.
Change how? By arresting and charging those in the wrong?
More prevalent than what? The 50s? 60s? 80s? 00s?
Prove it. Prove it's more prevalent. I'd bet dollars to cents it's probably far less prevalent than it's ever been before....it's just more visible.
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
I'm not saying that things can't be any better....
I'm saying the mob won't make them better. I'm saying I see nothing but shortsighted scapegoating and misplaced priorities from those screaming for change. I'm saying that emotionally driven media generated outrage isn't going to suddenly provide us with any good solutions.
In fact, I think it's likely to do more harm than good.
If you had to choose between a dozen people mistreated by the state or a thousand people mistreated by the community....which would you choose?
How?
Like DUI? Or speeding?
Because they are criminals who don't want to be arrested. Maybe they have a warrant for murder....maybe they are high on drugs or drunk....maybe they have someone stuffed in the trunk.
There's really no way to know without checking and in all of those cases, I'd want the person stopped and arrested on the spot.
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
I think that's the problem. Let's take George Floyd as an example. The officer who choked him to death on the street had NUMEROUS previous complaints against him. Yet there he was out on the street.
Thankfully I gave concrete examples in that same post just a few lines later! (Oh yeah and DEFINITELY arrest the people doing it. But, again, look at George Floyd as a good example. George Floyd was apparently trying to pass a counterfeit $20. He got a death sentence there and then on the street. The guy who killed him? He got to go home, sit around a couple days, have some discussions with the City to arrange for his plea, etc. So, well, I think you can see there might be some indicators of a difference in the speed of justice.)
"About 1,000 civilians are killed each year by law-enforcement officers in the United States. By one estimate, Black men are 2.5 times more likely than white men to be killed by police during their lifetime. And in another study, Black people who were fatally shot by police seemed to be twice as likely as white people to be unarmed". (What the data say about police brutality and racial bias — and which reforms might work)
"Based on information from more than two million 911 calls in two US cities, he concluded that white officers dispatched to Black neighbourhoods fired their guns five times as often as Black officers dispatched for similar calls to the same neighbourhoods" (ibid)
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
"About 1,000 civilians are killed each year by law-enforcement officers in the United States. By one estimate, Black men are 2.5 times more likely than white men to be killed by police during their lifetime. And in another study, Black people who were fatally shot by police seemed to be twice as likely as white people to be unarmed." (What the data say about police brutality and racial bias — and which reforms might work) (Emphasis added)
...and of course be inclusive. But kudos on denigrating even that.
Ahhh, so you are reading minds! Good job! It is best to read minds and find only the most EVIL INTENT in everything...even if no such intent is actually spoken or indicated. But, hey, it's a great way to start.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
OK. That has some valid points though I do not totally agree. However there is a catch 22 because without the mob to highlight the issue nothing changes. Heck even with the mob things have not changed until it got to a breaking point.
That is a hard on to answer because it is not black and white. For example if it was a 1000 people with minor property damage and 12 people killed by the state I would prefer the former. Here is the issue I have and it is the same issue I have with the death penalty. Even one person wrongly executed by the state is to much. I would rather let a possibly guilty man go free then kill an innocent man.
Like I said, by reducing their fight or flight response.
Yes. Issue an infraction and call them a CAB. Why is it necessary to arrest them on the spot?
This is my point. If we did not check those things and arrest them on the spot then there would be no fight or flight escalation and traffic police would have a lot less issues. Is this not a win for both sides?
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
How many complaints were investigated? How many were found to be valid? What was the recourse?
He was charged with murder...
Surely you can understand the difference between two completely different situations....can't you? If a regular citizen kills someone deliberately....they usually get arrested on the spot.
If someone that we pay to do a job that includes, sometimes, defending his life or the lives of others with deadly force ends up killing someone....there's a bit more to consider.
This seems so obvious it shouldn't require explanation.
Unfortunately, I've looked at those cases before....and in the vast majority of unarmed people being killed, they tried to take a gun from an officer.
I don't know what you think that proves. Are white officers being dispatched 5 times as often as black ones?
Upvote
0
Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree. Things may not change overnight....but they do change. 10 years ago...Derek Chauvin may not have been charged. Now, his like are charged relatively quickly.
It's change....just not as fast as some may want.
Let's say it's 1000 deaths or a dozen.
I don't see it the same way. Being killed by the guy down the street is a tragedy in every way that being killed by a cop is. I don't think you'd have the gall to tell someone who lost a child to gang violence "Hey, look on the upside...at least they weren't killed by the police."
That's not an answer. You could be talking about lobotomies for all I know. Give a real practical answer.
What if he gets out of the cab...and gets in a car and kills himself? What if he kills someone else?
What are you going to tell the aggrieved? That it's a good thing we didn't arrest him?
Lol no! Good grief...it's not a win for their next victim, or themselves, or the cop who necessarily shows up at the door to arrest them and gets shot.
Upvote
0
istodolez
Well-Known Member
- Jun 7, 2020
- 1,065
- 1,036
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
And George Floyd wasn't even charged.
Yes. Black man with counterfeit $20 bill gets death sentence immediately. White cop gets a couple days to negotiate with the DA before being taken into jail
And when you wrote to the people doing the analysis of the data (Edwards, F., Hedwig, L. & Esposito, M. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 16793-16798 (2019), Nix, J., Campbell, B. A., Byers, E. H. & Alpert, G. P. Criminol. Public Policy 16, 309–340 (2017)), what did they say? Did you publish in these journals to point out the errors?
I ask because one of my favorite experiences in my career as a researcher was when I was picked to be peer reviewer for a paper in which the author found an error in one of my earlier papers. I was so happy they found the error that I whole-heartedly recommended the article be published! So did Edwards et al. find your analysis of the data compelling? How did they respond?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 10, 2011
- 10,579
- 3,601
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Green
Upvote
0
Similar threads
