The problem with the Black Lives Matters movement...

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

You should have used flashing pink uppercase letters for additional emphasis...

You BLM types sure picked a real winner to be your standard bearer this time. Laughing

0 Replies

Robert Gentel wrote:

The problem with much of the Black Lives Matters movement actions (not the concept itself, the execution) is that most of the time the participants don't articulate any solutions and just yell at the people who they need to work with. I'm glad Obama is helping point out to them that just yelling about what they are against doesn't help anything. To enact change you can't just be against something you must also be for something. They need to work harder on articulating not just the dissatisfaction with the status quo but also what it is they want from the people they are yelling at to do (many of whom agree with them on the problem but don't understand why they are being yelled at mindlessly).

I guess they finally found something that they are for.

But I don't think "abolish the police" is going to be too popular with mainstream America.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

The problem with much of the Black Lives Matters movement actions (not the concept itself, the execution) is that most of the time the participants don't articulate any solutions and just yell at the people who they need to work with. I'm glad Obama is helping point out to them that just yelling about what they are against doesn't help anything. To enact change you can't just be against something you must also be for something.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Quote:

It started out as a chapter-based, member-led organization whose mission was to build local power and to intervene when violence was inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes.

Police of course, are an arm of the State. I would have thought that calling for an end to State violence against people based on their colour, was being for something. Do they need to go further than that? Is that in itself, not a worthwhile goal?

I agree that being against something without a solution is poor, and doesn't 'offer a way out'...but is that really what the heart of the movement is doing? I doubt it. The way out is for the State to stop enacting needless violence against black people. Ie. They are offering a solution.

I used 'the heart of the movement' because of course, there will be many other agendas that tack themselves on to any such protests.

1 Reply

I’m excited. I believe real change is coming because enough people are done with the insulting murderous status quo.

Incrementalism is over.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Self defense is hardly murder.

But I'd like to see some of the harmful tactics like no-knock warrants abolished.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Police of course, are an arm of the State. I would have thought that calling for an end to State violence against people based on their colour, was being for something. Do they need to go further than that? Is that in itself, not a worthwhile goal?

Demanding that police officers be prevented from defending themselves when they are murdered by a black person is not even remotely a worthwhile goal.

Their use of the term "vigilante" in what you quoted from them is a code word for any white person who isn't a police officer who tries to defend themselves. Note their lynching of George Zimmerman.

vikorr wrote:

I agree that being against something without a solution is poor, and doesn't 'offer a way out'...but is that really what the heart of the movement is doing? I doubt it. The way out is for the State to stop enacting needless violence against black people. Ie. They are offering a solution.

An officer's defense against someone who is trying to murder him is not even remotely needless.

Letting police officers and white people be murdered with impunity is not a solution.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Demanding that police officers be prevented from defending themselves when they are murdered by a black person is not even remotely a worthwhile goal.

Are you reading only what you want to read? I did say:

- "State violence against people based on their colour"; and

- "The way out is for the State to stop enacting needless violence against black people."

Neither says that police officers can't defend themselves, from anyone. To have read and comprehended so poorly suggests ulterior motives when reading.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Referring to justified self defense as "needless" before you try to abolish it, does not change the fact that you are trying to abolish justified self defense.

I do get that BLM goons only want to abolish justified self defense against murderers with dark skin. My post was consistent with that fact.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

That’s a start. I’ll have you converted in no time.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Referring to justified self defense as "needless" before you try to abolish it does not change the fact that you are trying to abolish justified self defense.

So seeing only what you want to see...

...as I've defended police officers right to self defense before. The media often enough presents a 'sensationalist' version of what happens, leaving out important information (which then gives an incorrect understanding of surrounding events), so that peoples emotions are stirred. This stirring of emotions keeps people tuning in to what they consider to be 'news'.

You see the word needless and assign what you fear 'needless' to mean, while I mean 'needless' to mean needless, no necessity, pointless etc. You can choose to stop letting your fears rule your comprehension.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

So seeing only what you want to see...
...as I've defended police officers right to self defense before.

I'm not condemning you. I'm condemning Black Lives Matter.

vikorr wrote:

You see the word needless and assign what you fear 'needless' to mean, while I mean 'needless' to mean needless, no necessity, pointless etc.

I'm sure you define the term exactly as you say you do.

But that's not how Black Lives Matter defines the term.

vikorr wrote:

You can choose to stop letting your fears rule your comprehension.

I let reality rule my comprehension.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

That’s a start. I’ll have you converted in no time.

I think I've no objections to outlawing choke holds as well.

When done properly, choke holds are safe and effective. But cops keep doing it wrong. And it looks as if the only way to prevent them from doing it wrong is to prohibit the tactic altogether.

I've also heard of a proposal along the lines of "officers who chase down a suspect should not be the first ones to touch the suspect".

I think the idea is that the aggression of the chase can lead to rough handling during the arrest.

That sounds like a laudable goal, but I can't quite picture how it actually works, because it seems to me like the chasers would have to tackle the suspect in order to end the chase.

But I haven't heard the proposal described in detail, so there is probably an aspect of the proposal that I don't know about.

0 Replies

The problem with the Black Lives Matters movement...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know