Something doesn't feel right about BLM

[TexFire316]

Please be respectful in this thread regardless of the opinions of others! Thank you!

I don't know about you, but for me, something about the Black Lives Matter movement just seems a little... off to me. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about it doesn't seem right, and it's deeply unsettling to me that everyone has jumped on the bandwagon to declare that they stand with BLM.

Now, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with believing that "black lives matter" because, in actuality, they DO matter! Everyone's life matters, and I think that it's okay that we're focusing on black lives mattering too right now... BUT, at the same time, I think there's something very wrong going on when there are "white" people apologizing for being white, police officers being targeted with awful slogans that say that they're ALL terrible people, and people are using the name of BLM to violently riot in the streets.

But I think one of the things that unsettles me the most is the fact that just about every single company and celebrity, even overseas, have said that they are standing with BLM. Something about that tips me off as very blatant "virtue-signaling" and like they're using this to profit off of us. Maybe this last point has more to do with the companies and not the BLM movement itself, but it still makes me thing something really "not right" is going on here. In other words, I'm highly skeptical of everyone and everything right now.

Is it just me? Am I crazy in thinking that something might not be so right about the BLM movement?? Someone please let me know.

No, not just you. And you seem to be waking up to things around you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ok, fair enough. I missed that that's the specific stat you were looking for. However, I have to ask why that particular number is so important.

Well the claim was made about drug sales...

Setting that aside ...drug use is a red herring. It's a blatant attempt at misinformation.

Don't you ever wonder why we don't examine crime rates for other crimes? How about grand theft auto?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ok, fair enough. I missed that that's the specific stat you were looking for. However, I have to ask why that particular number is so important. As the second source I posted (the one from Human Rights Watch) made pretty clear, the vast majority of arrests are for possession, not sales. In 2007 (the most recent data in that report), 83% of drug-related arrests were for possession. 17% were for sales.

Let's look at the raw data...

Table 43

That's the easiest table to follow. Look at the percentages at the end....you can see what percentage of what crime is done by black offenders. Any percentage higher than 13% means they're doing a disproportionately higher amount of crime.

Notice a pattern? They're all higher than 13%....all of them. The only exception is DUI and liquor laws.

What exactly is your belief? Drug crimes are some sort of exception? They're getting a raw deal on drug crimes?

 

[jgarden]

Something doesn't feel right about BLM

165 years after the Civil War and watching successive waves of "white" immigrants from Europe migrate and succeed in becoming integrated into American society, perhaps BLM has come to the realization that playing by the rules and listening to their critics only results in the "status quo!"

There is still an element of society that still deeply resents that a "black" American was elected President - prior to 2016 they were called "birthers" and lead by Donald J Trump!

 

[Lost4words]

Beyoncé: 'Vote like our life depends on it'

Surely BET is racism.

 

[RDKirk]

Please be respectful in this thread regardless of the opinions of others! Thank you!

I don't know about you, but for me, something about the Black Lives Matter movement just seems a little... off to me. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about it doesn't seem right, and it's deeply unsettling to me that everyone has jumped on the bandwagon to declare that they stand with BLM.

Now, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with believing that "black lives matter" because, in actuality, they DO matter! Everyone's life matters, and I think that it's okay that we're focusing on black lives mattering too right now... BUT, at the same time, I think there's something very wrong going on when there are "white" people apologizing for being white, police officers being targeted with awful slogans that say that they're ALL terrible people, and people are using the name of BLM to violently riot in the streets.

But I think one of the things that unsettles me the most is the fact that just about every single company and celebrity, even overseas, have said that they are standing with BLM. Something about that tips me off as very blatant "virtue-signaling" and like they're using this to profit off of us. Maybe this last point has more to do with the companies and not the BLM movement itself, but it still makes me thing something really "not right" is going on here. In other words, I'm highly skeptical of everyone and everything right now.

Is it just me? Am I crazy in thinking that something might not be so right about the BLM movement?? Someone please let me know.

First, BLM is not an organization as people are accustomed to consider them. It's not like, say, the NAACP, which has a national hierarchy with state and local chapters certified by the national hierarchy. It doesn't have a specific platform that all members must accept and confirm. There is no council that can revoke anyone's non-existent BLM membership card.

It's actually closer to the #MeToo movement than to a conventional organization. It's basically a sentiment, and anyone with a microphone can generate impetus from the sentiment and run in any given direction with it.

For instance, it's widely known among blacks that the two women who originated the #BLM hashtag are far more interested in LGBT issues than black-oriented racial issues, and they frequently use BLM as their LGBT stalking horse. Consequently, when we hear those particular women are involved in a "BLM event," we tend to ignore it, because it's not going to be about black lives mattering.

Others, such as Shaun King (derisively known among blacks as "Talcum X") have used "BLM" to some benefit of black lives mattering, but also use it as a vehicle for numerous tangential racial pet peeves that have nothing to do with the unjust killing of blacks by police.

At the same time, when a specific event or issue in a city is concerned with black lives mattering, those people will use "BLM" as well, and attract the attention of people who agree with the sentiment that black lives should matter when facing the police.

#BlackLivesMatter is a hashtag. There isn't anything that can keep anyone from merely slapping the hashtav on anything they want. In some cases, it's valid. In some cases it's not. There isn't even an authoritative organization that can authoritatively refute an invalid use of the term.

And that means corporations can jump on the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag just as they can jump on the #MeToo hashtag. There's nobody to say they can't or even to say that they don't mean it.

We just ignore it when it happens. Unfortunately, Internet spin makes people with the microphone appear to be larger than they really are. White people end up clutching their pearls over white media circular reporting of things black people are ignoring.

Taking the pulse of black Twitter users on a particular issue can indicate whether it's "really" a BLM issue that black people care about, or whether we're ignoring it.

 

[Radagast]

First, BLM is not an organization as people are accustomed to consider them.

It's an organisation.

It has leaders (Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, Opal Tometi), it has a hierarchy (with 30 chapters), it has a website, it has a policy document, it has a fundraising structure, and it (partially) controls use of the BLM name.

White people end up clutching their pearls

I'm really getting sick of this line. Many white people are more disadvantaged than black people are. They don't actually own pearls.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Let's look at the raw data...

Table 43

That's the easiest table to follow. Look at the percentages at the end....you can see what percentage of what crime is done by black offenders. Any percentage higher than 13% means they're doing a disproportionately higher amount of crime.

No, any percentage higher than 13% on those tables means that they're being charged with a disproportionate amount of crime. Not every criminal is arrested, and not every criminal who is arrested is charged.

Notice a pattern? They're all higher than 13%....all of them. The only exception is DUI and liquor laws.

What exactly is your belief? Drug crimes are some sort of exception? They're getting a raw deal on drug crimes?

No, I think they're getting a raw deal on most - if not all - crimes. Drug crimes are just one of the easiest to clearly demonstrate that fact since we have solid statistics on drug use that can be compared to arrests. If blacks and whites use drugs at a similar rate, which the statistics show to be true, we should see a proportional number of arrests of blacks and whites for drug possession. But we don't.

 

[Bobber]

There is still an element of society that still deeply resents that a "black" American was elected President - prior to 2016 they were called "birthers" and lead by Donald J Trump!

So what evidence do you have to prove that "birthers" actually were opposed to a black man becoming President? If a candidate was suspected of having been born in say Russia and had a white ethnicity how can you prove they wouldn't be opposed to them as well? It seems to me you're just making this up. Sure it could never be said there weren't any people that didn't want a black man President. With over 300 million in population sure there had to be some....but how do you connect that with any facts to the birther movement. Their motives for resisting whatever candidate can be just that.....they don't or didn't believe one was eligible under the Constitution.

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, any percentage higher than 13% on those tables means that they're being charged with a disproportionate amount of crime. Not every criminal is arrested, and not every criminal who is arrested is charged.

Actually it's arrested and charged but sure....there's going to be a percentage of crimes unsolved.

No, I think they're getting a raw deal on most - if not all - crimes.

Yeesh...the sad truth is more crimes go unsolved in predominantly black neighborhoods.

Drug crimes are just one of the easiest to clearly demonstrate that fact since we have solid statistics on drug use that can be compared to arrests. If blacks and whites use drugs at a similar rate, which the statistics show to be true, we should see a proportional number of arrests of blacks and whites for drug possession. But we don't.

And that's the misinformation....drug use doesn't equal drug possession or sales.

If we did a survey of people who used marijuana in the past 6 months, we'd get positive responses from all kinds of people. For example, both someone who was passed a joint at a concert and someone who drives around town 4 times a week smoking a joint would answer yes...but only one of those 2 is in any real danger of being caught for possession.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Had not heard about that. It is extremely unfortunate if it is key to the BLM movement. Similar arguments were made against some leaders of the Women's March.

Thanks for passing that along.

Here's one from today...

Jewish groups speak out after Black Lives Matter claims politicians are 'gagged' from criticising Israel

 

[istodolez]

Here's one from today...

Jewish groups speak out after Black Lives Matter claims politicians are 'gagged' from criticising Israel

A similar thing happened with the Women's March. Shortly after it got some legs and really started to take off there was a disagreement at the higher levels because some would not disavow Louis Farrakhan. It is really unfortunate when a subset of the group wants to drag all that into it.

The original BLM movement, like the Women's March has at its core (and still maintains) a noble cause and decent goals. There's no stated BLM goal to hate on Jews or anything like that. If it becomes more mainstream within the movement I will simply refer to the concept of "Black Lives Matter" rather than the ORGANIZATION since the concept is still very much a valuable concept.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Actually it's arrested and charged but sure....there's going to be a percentage of crimes unsolved.

I don't see how that contradicts what I said. Moreover, I wasn't referring to unsolved crimes, but rather cases where the perpetrator is known, but is not charged. Typically because he has a good lawyer who makes him a deal with the prosecutor. This is more common for white people because, stitistically, they are more likely to be able to afford a good lawyer.

And that's the misinformation....drug use doesn't equal drug possession or sales.

If we did a survey of people who used marijuana in the past 6 months, we'd get positive responses from all kinds of people. For example, both someone who was passed a joint at a concert and someone who drives around town 4 times a week smoking a joint would answer yes...but only one of those 2 is in any real danger of being caught for possession.

And do you have any reason to believe the second person is more likely to be black?

 

[Ana the Ist]

So your approach is to NOT engage in the conversation honestly? I never said there was a LAW demanding blacks receive harsher sentences for the same as whites. BUT IT HAPPENS.

Then it's not part of a system...

If it's written in law or policy you can argue it's systemic....but since it isn't, it can't be.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Yeah, whatever.

That's drug possession....and is not the same as use.

[QUOTE
Rocks beat me to it. Cool.[/QUOTE]

Drug use and drug possession aren't the same thing.

Do unicorns wander down the streets where you live?

If a law says it's illegal to steal a car....and 1000 black people steal a car for every 500 white people who steal a car....does that make the law racist?

It's not a complicated question....use common sense.

Well, let's just say when I search the AMerican Politics forum and filter it by my handle and the search term "solutions" I get let's count... 7 results right off the bat. Of course some of the recent ones are me trying to tell you to DO YER OWN HOMEWORK, but the earlier ones discuss specific solutions.

So, your "Truth" is just like your TrumpTruth: alternate fact. Here's a screenshot of some of the returns (the funny thing is, I could point you to any single one of these directly but it's so FUNNY to watch you fail at a simple, simple task! LOL. Sorry, I know it's rude to laugh at someone's lack of skill in simple topics, but c'mon...)

View attachment 279852

And the funny part is that in all 7 of those posts....you offer zero solutions. It's mostly you complaining about others needing to come up with solutions.

Like I said....you don't have any answers.

 

[Ana the Ist]

A similar thing happened with the Women's March. Shortly after it got some legs and really started to take off there was a disagreement at the higher levels because some would not disavow Louis Farrakhan. It is really unfortunate when a subset of the group wants to drag all that into it.

The original BLM movement, like the Women's March has at its core (and still maintains) a noble cause and decent goals. There's no stated BLM goal to hate on Jews or anything like that. If it becomes more mainstream within the movement I will simply refer to the concept of "Black Lives Matter" rather than the ORGANIZATION since the concept is still very much a valuable concept.

Say it with me now...

Black Lives Matter has racists at all levels.

It's got racists at the bottom....it's got racists at the top. It defends and works with racist hate groups. These are facts.

They aren't interested in ending racism....just racism towards blacks. They seem to want to cling to their racism.

Weren't you saying that we needed an open and honest discussion? Haven't I offered you enough evidence yet?

 

[RDKirk]

It's an organisation.

It has leaders (Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, Opal Tometi), it has a hierarchy (with 30 chapters), it has a website, it has a policy document, it has a fundraising structure, and it (partially) controls use of the BLM name.

Anyone can buy a domain name. It does not have chapters that are hierarchically controlled as, say, the NAACP or a fraternity. BLM is not an organization that can, for instance, revoke a chapter's charter. People anywhere can say, "we're a chapter of BLM" and there isn't anything anyone else can do about it.

BLM doesn't have a fundraising structure. People who choose to associate themselves with BLM can donate money to Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, Opal Tometi through a fund-collection technology company that operates much like GoFundMe and Facebook. It's a third-party system set up to funnel money from small donors, and BLM isn't its only client.

The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter was originated by Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, but those are recognized by blacks as being primarily interested in LGBT affairs, not black affairs, and they use BLM as their stalking horse. Most black people endorse the sentiment that black lives matter when dealing with the police, but we also now know to ignore most of what Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi have to say.

I'm really getting sick of this line. Many white people are more disadvantaged than black people are. They don't actually own pearls.

The pearls are understood to be imaginary. It refers to "Susans" (that is, Boomer "Karens") who raise their hands to their throats when shocked.

 

[RDKirk]

So what evidence do you have to prove that "birthers" actually were opposed to a black man becoming President? If a candidate was suspected of having been born in say Russia and had a white ethnicity how can you prove they wouldn't be opposed to them as well? It seems to me you're just making this up. Sure it could never be said there weren't any people that didn't want a black man President. With over 300 million in population sure there had to be some....but how do you connect that with any facts to the birther movement. Their motives for resisting whatever candidate can be just that.....they don't or didn't believe one was eligible under the Constitution.

The question was initially a valid one, but after quickly being proven by the State of Hawaii, continued harping on the issue was something other than honest Constitutional concern.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I don't see how that contradicts what I said. Moreover, I wasn't referring to unsolved crimes, but rather cases where the perpetrator is known, but is not charged. Typically because he has a good lawyer who makes him a deal with the prosecutor. This is more common for white people because, stitistically, they are more likely to be able to afford a good lawyer.

If you're imagining plea deals don't happen and charges don't get dropped for black people....you're wrong.

And do you have any reason to believe the second person is more likely to be black?

I have no reason to believe that I can look at any two groups of people and expect them to engage in the exact same behavior, with the same level of risk, making the same effort to be careful, in all places at all times.

That's just....stupid.

 

[lordjeff]

i'm not bothered by their group name but I am bothered by their lack of leadership on using nonviolent means. They are professional organizers & admitted marxists. Recently now we see they are looking for physical confrontation & that is not going to earn them any support of the public to try and get this police reform done. Today there's a video where they thought they could just walk onto a man's mansion. They forget that it is the 2nd amendment that will control the outcome of this chaotic yeear. By trying to intimidate business owners or people who live in good houses, they will be retaliated at by guns. So they are getting overconfident. I'm sure a good part of the public by now have contacted their local & federal lawmakers to proceed thoroughly on police reform. But if this is just a game of oneupsmanship we are bound to fall short & end up a national rebellion. I do not want the Klan out but they will come out if they see this. Now alot of mayors are absconding their public duty in order to curry favor. This is a prime example why none of these mayors have any leadership skills & should never hold office again. Obviously they lack the persuasive words to tell these folks we can get the stuff solved thru the democratic process. In addition, these folks are trying to say Marxism works--what because Americans can run it better than China. Economic science & political science are failed systems that lead to tyranny because mankind is so lustful for power. It's not enough to say that americans can run it better what because we're more virtuous. Really? Their goal is not equality; their goal is revenge.

 

[istodolez]

Say it with me now...

Black Lives Matter has racists at all levels.

Nope.

It's got racists at the bottom....it's got racists at the top. It defends and works with racist hate groups. These are facts.

They are not facts but you are free to think that.

Weren't you saying that we needed an open and honest discussion? Haven't I offered you enough evidence yet?

Nope. I agree what you pointed to is troubling and I know you hope to the deepest levels of your soul that you will get me to chant in unison with you, but I won't.

Sorry. BLM didn't start off as a racist concept and even if the org aligns themselves with Farrakhan I won't align with that. But I do honestly believe in the original intent: that if all lives matter that we must also act like BLACK LIVES MATTER.

I don't know why this has to be so complicated. Unless, of course, you have some bigger reason to repudiate the concept.