BLM gets Divisive Again

[Ana the Ist]

How would you classify BLM, if not populist? Surely it's not so unique that it's the first of it's kind, right?

It's got more in common with the groups of black militant civil rights movements (think Black Panthers) than really anything else. The main difference is the language is mostly Marxist to broaden the appeal. So instead of black liberation for black nationalism....they say they want racial justice. They don't want equality....they want racial sovereignty...so they say things like support black this, support black that, no lives matter until black lives matter. If you believe that, they can endlessly justify this constant effort to support only black people which is at the loss of every other group. Think about it...if you were to do what they suggest and only buy from black businesses, would that help asian businesses? What about latino businesses? What about white businesses? Do they really think we should divide up by race and compete against each other? This is black nationalism.

If you or anyone other than me had bothered to look at the first iteration of BLM demands they posted online...this is easily observable. The demands included things that would have basically created an autonomous black nation (with borders and everything) where black people excluded all others and were in total control of their society ...though possibly funded by the US. They never really bother with working out the economics of their dreams.

When the leaders announced they were Marxists...I said oh, ok...I get it then.

Are they Marxists using racial nationalism to push Marxist goals? Are they racial nationalists using Marxism to push racial nationalist goals? Does it really matter if we figure this out? They might not even be certain.

What I do know is they are awful people. Their ideas are poison to free Democracy. They are big idea thinkers who believe they are smart enough to change their environment and care little about the lives damaged in the process.

The simple point is this....legitimate movements don't hide goals or problems. MLK wanted to end segregation and criminalize racial discrimination....legitimate goals in a society where the idea of equality under the law is fundamental. He didn't seek to change everything. He clearly wanted to change those things.

I don't know what the goals of this group are. I don't know what the problem is. Broadly these are moving targets when you try to have them defined specifically. None of these people have any clue what racial justice is or what racial equity means. Systemic racism is clearly not a concept anyone agrees on or how it works. These aren't real goals...or real problems.

That enough should be a reason to not support the group.

I get it though...as I outlined above in ghe ship metaphor, if you are black, latino, or even asian...you will probably be able to voice your opinion to those steering the boat/movement even if they don't really listen or care....so it seems like you might benefit.

If you're white though, they made it clear they don't want you to speak at all...unless it's to spread their message. White doesn't have a voice....you're supposed to nod, accept blame, blame other whites, keep quiet around non-whites, and do the work.

I don't really have to know what the destination of the movement is to see where it imagines me and what my place is. It's not equality. They may very well decide I'm not needed around at all once the destination is reached.

These are awful people.

 

[RDKirk]

Seems to me like *all* white people are the elite in BLM's paradigm, under the theories of systemic racism and white-privilege. Therefore, only non-whites make up "the people", with a focus on blacks being the primary torch-holders of the movement... Making it a populist movement.

Inasmuch as many (if not most) BLM rallies are mostly white, I'd think not at the street level.

But the rhetoric of the organizers is frequently at odds with what the street-level people are thinking and doing.

But if "only non-whites make up 'the people,' with a focus on blacks being the primary torch-holders of the movement," then it can't really be called a populist movement in a realistic sense...it's appealing to only 13% of the population.

 

[Brihaha]

I’m sorry I don’t understand, are these businesses refusing to render their services to blacks? I don’t see that in the OP. Am I missing something?

I am also sorry you don't understand. The black community has to support itself and refusing to render their business to non-black merchants. I was merely illustrating how this tactic worked for them in Alabama. Our Supreme Court ended segregation on buses soon thereafter. That happened in the long, long ago yet many things remain the same for minorities in America. Having perspective on the oppression of others is not a strong virtue for some Americans. It's hard to understand their plight even for those who try. Sadly, plenty of Americans will not even try to see things from their perspective. The entire black community has far more patience and resilience than my Caucasian counterparts here in America it would seem. Some of these people are Ok with daily high school shootings yet get fighting mad over some book their child will likely never even pick up. Imagine if you watched friends and family die unnecessarily at the hands of a "superior race" for hundreds of years without consequence? How long would you tolerate it? What would be your recourse when your house appraises for 50% less value than the same house owned by a member of the "superior race"? We don't often think about the plight of others because we don't see it daily. You can see the disparities IF you want to.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Inasmuch as many (if not most) BLM rallies are mostly white, I'd think not at the street level.

But the rhetoric of the organizers is frequently at odds with what the street-level people are thinking and doing.

But if "only non-whites make up 'the people,' with a focus on blacks being the primary torch-holders of the movement," then it can't really be called a populist movement in a realistic sense...it's appealing to only 13% of the population.

Yes, but if "the elites" make up 87% of the U.S. population, then amongst the populace of the non-elites, you still have 100% of "the people".

 

[BNR32FAN]

I am also sorry you don't understand. The black community has to support itself and refusing to render their business to non-black merchants. I was merely illustrating how this tactic worked for them in Alabama. Our Supreme Court ended segregation on buses soon thereafter. That happened in the long, long ago yet many things remain the same for minorities in America. Having perspective on the oppression of others is not a strong virtue for some Americans. It's hard to understand their plight even for those who try. Sadly, plenty of Americans will not even try to see things from their perspective. The entire black community has far more patience and resilience than my Caucasian counterparts here in America it would seem. Some of these people are Ok with daily high school shootings yet get fighting mad over some book their child will likely never even pick up. Imagine if you watched friends and family die unnecessarily at the hands of a "superior race" for hundreds of years without consequence? How long would you tolerate it? What would be your recourse when your house appraises for 50% less value than the same house owned by a member of the "superior race"? We don't often think about the plight of others because we don't see it daily. You can see the disparities IF you want to.

Thats a great way to keep the problem going but I would suggest another tactic. How about we just don’t care what color a person is and go on with our lives? Isn’t that was equality is all about?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Inasmuch as many (if not most) BLM rallies are mostly white, I'd think not at the street level.

But the rhetoric of the organizers is frequently at odds with what the street-level people are thinking and doing.

Here's the thing about a decentralized movement. It uses a broad banner to grab a large group of people to pursue its goals.

At the street level of organization....there's no goal. It's just raising a banner, marching, protesting, expressing outrage, criticizing imperfection.

The top level of the organization benefits. The tshirts sold, donations made, funds collected all go to the top. Street level organizers are just generating publicity and viral outrage that promotes the brand. That's all they do. They don't have any goal. They just have vague targets.

Meanwhile the top level keeps generating wealth. This isn't a decentralized organization that values local community involvement. It's a highly centralized organization that dupes local community volunteers into making them money.

I don't know to what ends. I would assume it's the original highly revised draft BLM put out if the organizers hadn't moved to donate to Democrats and push new curriculum into schools.

Does that sound paranoid? They did this openly. I can give you multiple sources of school counselors and administrators and psychologists and all agreeing to statements of support and desire to change curriculums to the ones of diversity equity and Inclusion that are currently being rejected by parents...as outlined by BLM, a Marxist led organisation that has claimed a desire to destroy the western European nuclear family.

Have a look...

Black Lives Matter at School - Resources - NEA EdJustice

You can clearly see that as educators and school administrators got onboard, they increasingly adopted CRT Marxist views. This is the National Education Association.

You can go on there and see that BLM is the cause, if not the ones financially supporting the radicalizing of children in relation to sexual identity and race.

You don't hear about it on the streets because it has successfully infiltrated education and legislative institutions. That's why you have all these upset parents. There's a wide difference between teaching children knowledge and facts...and promoting the normalization of political views in effort to socially engineer a nation.

That makes me think they're more Marxist than anything...but I'm still pretty sure they're racists.

But if "only non-whites make up 'the people,' with a focus on blacks being the primary torch-holders of the movement," then it can't really be called a populist movement in a realistic sense...it's appealing to only 13% of the population.

Well that's just it RDKirk. Marxist dialectics was applied after they gained massive support. Early on they were criticized for focusing on a small problem....unjustified police shootings against black people. The response, as you know, was that they...just like everyone else....were free to pursue any cause they wanted as activists. I agree.

Later, around 2019-2020 and definitely after Floyd....the message became silence is violence....not supporting us makes you complicit in the problem. What happened to everyone being free to pursue their own causes? Gone. You're with them or the enemy.

I know you can see these two positions are opposed. I agree with the first. The second is Marxist dialectics or as the ancient Greek would say....a false dichotomy. It's you're either anti-racist or racist. You're either a white ally rowing the boat....or in the way.

These people haven't been honest since day 1.

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, but if "the elites" make up 87% of the U.S. population, then amongst the populace of the non-elites, you still have 100% of "the people".

If you want to call that "populist," you're distorting the word as much as people who call ever slight "racism."

Don't be part of the same problem.

 

[rjs330]

We're talking about "the elite." Populists split the electorate into "the people" and "the elite."

Exactly who "the elite" is depends on the politician spinning it. Trump is a populist; his "elite" didn't include millionaire such as himself, but the "liberal elite." But the populist is sure to use a formula in which "the elite" is a much narrower slice of the whole than "the people" he's appealing to.

As I said in my first post, practically all politicians these days spout a populist spiel.

Aren't they claiming the whites are the elite? I mean in the OP the deliberately call it white capitalism. They claim all systems are designed to keep whites in power. This creating the elitism of whites.

 

[RDKirk]

Here's the thing about a decentralized movement. It uses a broad banner to grab a large group of people to pursue its goals.

At the street level of organization....there's no goal. It's just raising a banner, marching, protesting, expressing outrage, criticizing imperfection.

The top level of the organization benefits. The tshirts sold, donations made, funds collected all go to the top. Street level organizers are just generating publicity and viral outrage that promotes the brand. That's all they do. They don't have any goal. They just have vague targets.

Meanwhile the top level keeps generating wealth. This isn't a decentralized organization that values local community involvement. It's a highly centralized organization that dupes local community volunteers into making them money.

I don't know to what ends. I would assume it's the original highly revised draft BLM put out if the organizers hadn't moved to donate to Democrats and push new curriculum into schools.

Does that sound paranoid? They did this openly. I can give you multiple sources of school counselors and administrators and psychologists and all agreeing to statements of support and desire to change curriculums to the ones of diversity equity and Inclusion that are currently being rejected by parents...as outlined by BLM, a Marxist led organisation that has claimed a desire to destroy the western European nuclear family.

Have a look...

Black Lives Matter at School - Resources - NEA EdJustice

You can clearly see that as educators and school administrators got onboard, they increasingly adopted CRT Marxist views. This is the National Education Association.

You can go on there and see that BLM is the cause, if not the ones financially supporting the radicalizing of children in relation to sexual identity and race.

You don't hear about it on the streets because it has successfully infiltrated education and legislative institutions. That's why you have all these upset parents. There's a wide difference between teaching children knowledge and facts...and promoting the normalization of political views in effort to socially engineer a nation.

That makes me think they're more Marxist than anything...but I'm still pretty sure they're racists.




Well that's just it RDKirk. Marxist dialectics was applied after they gained massive support. Early on they were criticized for focusing on a small problem....unjustified police shootings against black people. The response, as you know, was that they...just like everyone else....were free to pursue any cause they wanted as activists. I agree.

Later, around 2019-2020 and definitely after Floyd....the message became silence is violence....not supporting us makes you complicit in the problem. What happened to everyone being free to pursue their own causes? Gone. You're with them or the enemy.

I know you can see these two positions are opposed. I agree with the first. The second is Marxist dialectics or as the ancient Greek would say....a false dichotomy. It's you're either anti-racist or racist. You're either a white ally rowing the boat....or in the way.

These people haven't been honest since day 1.

The original organizers always claimed to be Marxist.

 

[RDKirk]

Aren't they claiming the whites are the elite? I mean in the OP the deliberately call it white capitalism. They claim all systems are designed to keep whites in power. This creating the elitism of whites.

If you want to call categorizing 87% of the population as "elite" as an example of "populism," you're distorting the word as much as people who call ever slight "racism."

Don't be part of the same problem.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I am also sorry you don't understand. The black community has to support itself and refusing to render their business to non-black merchants. I was merely illustrating how this tactic worked for them in Alabama. Our Supreme Court ended segregation on buses soon thereafter. That happened in the long, long ago yet many things remain the same for minorities in America. Having perspective on the oppression of others is not a strong virtue for some Americans. It's hard to understand their plight even for those who try. Sadly, plenty of Americans will not even try to see things from their perspective. The entire black community has far more patience and resilience than my Caucasian counterparts here in America it would seem. Some of these people are Ok with daily high school shootings yet get fighting mad over some book their child will likely never even pick up. Imagine if you watched friends and family die unnecessarily at the hands of a "superior race" for hundreds of years without consequence? How long would you tolerate it? What would be your recourse when your house appraises for 50% less value than the same house owned by a member of the "superior race"? We don't often think about the plight of others because we don't see it daily. You can see the disparities IF you want to.

Disparities are a never ending black hole of nonsense. They're used to prop up a narrative of oppression and discarded at convenience.

All you're really saying when you point to a disparity and assume a cause is the following...

1. You don't really understand statistics.
2. You don't understand the difficulty of proving cause and effect relationships in the outcomes of large groups.
3. You're starting from a false viewpoint that if two people, regardless of identity, were to start on a "level playing field" and pursue the same goals, they will end up at the same destination. This is also provably false.

If you don't have any evidence of oppression but still want to believe it, that's fine...but it's faith. I can and should be ignored.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The original organizers always claimed to be Marxist.

Did they? I don't recall that coming out till later when some old footage was dug up.

But let's assume everyone knew this about them...

Why would anyone ever follow a Marxist led movement? No matter what the cause?

 

[Landon Caeli]

If you want to call that "populist," you're distorting the word as much as people who call ever slight "racism."

What's ever slight racism?

 

[RDKirk]

Did they? I don't recall that coming out till later when some old footage was dug up.

But let's assume everyone knew this about them...

Why would anyone ever follow a Marxist led movement? No matter what the cause?

The two original organizers claimed on their website from the beginning that they were "trained Marxists."

 

[RDKirk]

What's ever slight racism?

I meant "slight actions." Like the Atlanta Ikea preparing fried chicken in their store cafeteria during African-American History Month. Calling that "racism" (which people did) is like calling BLM "populist."

 

[Ana the Ist]

The two original organizers claimed on their website from the beginning that they were "trained Marxists."

I don't recall them having a website at the beginning...I just remember they began with the slogan. It went viral as a hashtag. As it grew they made a website under a broader banner of anti-capitalist views....but as a lot of people don't like capitalism, I wouldn't call them Marxist for that.

It wasn't until old footage or something posted where Garza claimed she and Cullors were trained Marxists that I was certain. If I missed something earlier, I can't find it now.

Anyway, since Marxists are Marxists much in the sense that Nazis are Nazis....why support a Marxist movement?

It's not about anything except gaining power and destroying capitalism. I don't think Gramsci's long march through the institutions will work either. We get to watch these ideas fail over and over. We get to watch them fail in real time. People should eventually be able to figure out the common aspects and frankly, if they do... it will be a really bad time for Marxists and those supporting them.

We know that the rampant mobbing of stores is directly related to changes in crime codes pushed by the same people who want to defund the police and end prisons. Seems predictable that it won't work...but for some people, they gotta see it.

They increasingly will. Parents are already furious at what teachers are telling children. That happened pretty fast. Teachers are literally lying or ignorant about what they are teaching (the link I provided explicitly stated CRT frameworks as part of the curriculum). It won't be long before people demand accountability. I saw an example of teachers doxxing parents in Austin Texas I think.

Imagine if the police did this....told everyone your kid was caught selling drugs, where he lives, his age, name, pics.

How is it we aren't seriously demanding accountability here? No public servant should do that.

 

[rjs330]

If you want to call categorizing 87% of the population as "elite" as an example of "populism," you're distorting the word as much as people who call ever slight "racism."

Don't be part of the same problem.

Who says the elite MUST be a tiny sliver of the people.
elite
[əˈlēt, āˈlēt]
NOUN

1. a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society.
   "the elite of Britain's armed forces" · 
   best · pick · cream · [more]
   • a group or class of people seen as having the greatest power and influence within a society, especially because of their wealth or privilege.
     "the country's governing elite" · 

In this case the elite is "white people" they are seen as those having the greatest power and influence.

This fits with what BLM is promoting.

 

[RDKirk]

Who says the elite MUST be a tiny sliver of the people.
elite
[əˈlēt, āˈlēt]
NOUN

1. a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society.
   "the elite of Britain's armed forces" · 
   best · pick · cream · [more]
   • a group or class of people seen as having the greatest power and influence within a society, especially because of their wealth or privilege.
     "the country's governing elite" · 

In this case the elite is "white people" they are seen as those having the greatest power and influence.

This fits with what BLM is promoting.

Is BLM your role model now?

Just because they're logic is screwy doesn't mean you have to follow them.

 

[Landon Caeli]

It's got more in common with the groups of black militant civil rights movements (think Black Panthers) than really anything else. The main difference is the language is mostly Marxist to broaden the appeal. So instead of black liberation for black nationalism....they say they want racial justice. They don't want equality....they want racial sovereignty...so they say things like support black this, support black that, no lives matter until black lives matter. If you believe that, they can endlessly justify this constant effort to support only black people which is at the loss of every other group. Think about it...if you were to do what they suggest and only buy from black businesses, would that help asian businesses? What about latino businesses? What about white businesses? Do they really think we should divide up by race and compete against each other? This is black nationalism.

If you or anyone other than me had bothered to look at the first iteration of BLM demands they posted online...this is easily observable. The demands included things that would have basically created an autonomous black nation (with borders and everything) where black people excluded all others and were in total control of their society ...though possibly funded by the US. They never really bother with working out the economics of their dreams.

When the leaders announced they were Marxists...I said oh, ok...I get it then.

Are they Marxists using racial nationalism to push Marxist goals? Are they racial nationalists using Marxism to push racial nationalist goals? Does it really matter if we figure this out? They might not even be certain.

What I do know is they are awful people. Their ideas are poison to free Democracy. They are big idea thinkers who believe they are smart enough to change their environment and care little about the lives damaged in the process.

The simple point is this....legitimate movements don't hide goals or problems. MLK wanted to end segregation and criminalize racial discrimination....legitimate goals in a society where the idea of equality under the law is fundamental. He didn't seek to change everything. He clearly wanted to change those things.

I don't know what the goals of this group are. I don't know what the problem is. Broadly these are moving targets when you try to have them defined specifically. None of these people have any clue what racial justice is or what racial equity means. Systemic racism is clearly not a concept anyone agrees on or how it works. These aren't real goals...or real problems.

That enough should be a reason to not support the group.

I get it though...as I outlined above in ghe ship metaphor, if you are black, latino, or even asian...you will probably be able to voice your opinion to those steering the boat/movement even if they don't really listen or care....so it seems like you might benefit.

If you're white though, they made it clear they don't want you to speak at all...unless it's to spread their message. White doesn't have a voice....you're supposed to nod, accept blame, blame other whites, keep quiet around non-whites, and do the work.

I don't really have to know what the destination of the movement is to see where it imagines me and what my place is. It's not equality. They may very well decide I'm not needed around at all once the destination is reached.

These are awful people.

It's not surprising that Marxists would use populist-style techniques. I'm sure we remember the Marxist Occupy Wall Street movement. Obvious Marxists using populist techniques.

I see the divisiveness of these groups as one of their main features, whether it's dividing the 1% from the 99%, or the Whites and the blacks. Divisiveness is the game that populists play... It's their main feature... Divide and destroy and then rebuild.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Is BLM your role model now?

Just because they're logic is screwy doesn't mean you have to follow them.

BLM is under the microscope here, and divisiveness is what we're studying. Ad Homs don't help in the discussion. It just adds to the division, which causes more disruptions.