Personally I'm not attached to the verbiage of "shut up and listen"
It's a needlessly confrontational phrasing of a good sentiment.
Except it isn't needless, as it stems from specific historic roots. I really wish people would stop avoiding that aspect.
I'm not sure why you think using the words "shut up" is needed when there's far less insulting ways of phrasing the sentiment that you should not try and tell <insert oppressed group here> what their problems are and maybe listen to what they are saying.
Then you haven't been reading my posts.
I have. That's why I'm saying this. Because you haven't addressed this point at all.
Yes, I have - the fact is that white progressives have not been good about letting minority issues come to the forefront historically. And asking nicely hasn't really worked either. Hence the aggravated, "not going to take it anymore" stance inherent in "shut up and listen".
There's a difference between aggressive and insulting.
EDIT: Sorry ElJeffe, didn't see your post.
shryke on
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
I don't think caring about the issue has anything to do with solving it. A top flight marketing and strategy team with enormous resources could probably do a better job at fighting racism than a group of true believers that are personally invested in the fight, even if the marketing team doesn't care at all about the outcome other than professionally. Organization, political mobilization, messaging, etc are all skills. Being part of the affected group does not impart those skills.
Well hello there, Mr Post of Exactly the Sort I Just Said Was Not Appropriate!
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Because Minnesota has the largest Somali population in the US.
Why are there so many Somalis in Minnesota of all places?
They're refugees, that's all I know. And they've got a monopoly on department store retail jobs
I haven't seen them associated with BLM activities but I only caught the fringes at the demonstration at the state fair, so maybe they're active? A lot of people accosting others were white
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I worry about a movement like this because it seems to be headless. Sort of like an electronic OWS. I suspect it will be equally ineffective. One group can be doing good work like putting out the list of police reforms they want, but another group that speaks equally for the movement could murder a police officer on YouTube and while the other groups would no doubt condemn an action like that, everyone speaks equally since it's just a hashtag. Movement as identity instead of a leader as identity seems like a recipe for failure to me.
Leaderless movements are the new normal. If BLM or OWS had a leader you would be making the conversation about an individual instead of the issues at hand. If someone acting badly using the same hashtag as those fighting for social justice is enough to turn you off social justice, then you were never going to support social justice to begin with.
It's not going to turn me off of it.
But it's not me you have to turn onto the idea.
It's the ~80% who are indifferent. And in the U.S. if you are indifferent on a topic, any part of a group doing something that appears "bad", violent, or can be painted as such by the media they consume to get their news is going to make them an opponent.
I worry about a movement like this because it seems to be headless. Sort of like an electronic OWS. I suspect it will be equally ineffective. One group can be doing good work like putting out the list of police reforms they want, but another group that speaks equally for the movement could murder a police officer on YouTube and while the other groups would no doubt condemn an action like that, everyone speaks equally since it's just a hashtag. Movement as identity instead of a leader as identity seems like a recipe for failure to me.
Leaderless movements are the new normal. If BLM or OWS had a leader you would be making the conversation about an individual instead of the issues at hand. If someone acting badly using the same hashtag as those fighting for social justice is enough to turn you off social justice, then you were never going to support social justice to begin with.
It's not going to turn me off of it.
But it's not me you have to turn onto the idea.
It's the ~80% who are indifferent. And in the U.S. if you are indifferent on a topic, any part of a group doing something that appears "bad", violent, or can be painted as such by the media they consume to get their news is going to make them an opponent.
That's going to happen anyway with certain segments in society and the media (Fox News). Fighting for civil rights in America has always been a hard road for the minorities being oppressed, that didn't stop great achievements being made on that front.
Sometimes refugees were resettled in specific states (Bill Clinton's biography speaks of a wave of Vietnamese refugees being assigned to Arkansas during his tenure), or just gravitated towards specific states, like the Laotian communities in Texas.
I worry about a movement like this because it seems to be headless. Sort of like an electronic OWS. I suspect it will be equally ineffective. One group can be doing good work like putting out the list of police reforms they want, but another group that speaks equally for the movement could murder a police officer on YouTube and while the other groups would no doubt condemn an action like that, everyone speaks equally since it's just a hashtag. Movement as identity instead of a leader as identity seems like a recipe for failure to me.
Leaderless movements are the new normal. If BLM or OWS had a leader you would be making the conversation about an individual instead of the issues at hand. If someone acting badly using the same hashtag as those fighting for social justice is enough to turn you off social justice, then you were never going to support social justice to begin with.
It's not going to turn me off of it.
But it's not me you have to turn onto the idea.
It's the ~80% who are indifferent. And in the U.S. if you are indifferent on a topic, any part of a group doing something that appears "bad", violent, or can be painted as such by the media they consume to get their news is going to make them an opponent.
...80% of the U.S. population is either indifferent to or opposed to BLM?
CLEVELAND, OH -- Moments ago, organizers with GetEQUAL and Black Lives Matter disrupted Hillary Clinton’s grassroots campaign event in Cleveland, OH, demanding that she divest from private prisons and invest in the liberation of black transgender women.
The organizers interrupted Clinton’s speech in order to name the three black trans women who have been recently murdered in the state of Ohio including Cemia Dove, a black trans woman murdered in Cleveland, carrying signs that read: “Hillary: Divest from Private Prisons, Invest in Black Trans Women.” The action was part of a series of demonstrations happening this week across the country celebrating black transgender women and demanding accountability for the violence that Black transgender women face on a daily basis.
“Bankrolled by private prison companies and lobbyists like Corrections Corporation of America and the GEO Group, Hillary Clinton is part of the system of violence that criminalizes and kills Black trans people -- how can we take her policy suggestions to curb mass incarceration and detention seriously while she’s accepting this money?” asked Angela Peoples, co-director of grassroots LGBTQ network GetEQUAL and a disruptor of the event.
Peoples continued, “These companies and their lobbyists profit from the incarceration and abuse of Black people, especially Black trans women -- an overwhelming 41% of Black trans women report having been arrested at some point in their lives, often after having been profiled by the police.”
“Hillary Clinton must stand with Black people, especially Black trans women, by refusing to accept funds from or bundled by executives of or lobbyists for private prison companies -- and investing the money she’s already accepted from those companies in the work toward Black trans liberation,” said Rian Brown, GetEQUAL state lead and local Cleveland organizer taking part in the disruption. “Until that happens, we cannot for a moment think that Hillary believes Black Lives Matter.”
Brown added: “The actions that took place across the country on Tuesday were a call for cisgender Black folks to show up for Black trans people; we’re here to demand that Clinton divest from private prisons in solidarity with our Black trans family.”
See more from today’s action and this week’s “Trans Liberation Tuesday” under the hashtag #BlackTransLivesMatter. Pictures and video of the disruption are available on GetEQUAL’s Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/getequal.
Interviews available upon request.
###
GetEQUAL is a national grassroots social justice organization whose mission is to empower the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community and allies to take bold action to demand full legal and social equality, and to hold accountable those who stand in the way. For more information, go to www.getequal.org. You can also follow GetEQUAL on Facebook at www.facebook.com/getequal or on Twitter at @GetEQUAL.
Black Lives Matter is working for a world where Black lives are no longer systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. We affirm our contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression. We have put our sweat equity and love for Black people into creating a political project–taking the hashtag off of social media and into the streets. The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.
I'm not seeing the link to private prisons. Is there one?
And I'm not sure using #BlackTransLivesMatter is a good idea, since it sounds like they're trying to parody BLM (probably not the intent, but that was my initial reaction on reading it).
I think hashtags are the dumbest shit in general, though. Can't wait for twitter to go the way of myspace and geocities.
Private prisons introduce a profit motive into incarceration and heavily lobby state governments to increase punishments and jail time, because they get paid based on how many prisoners they're holding. Additionally, if the goal of the prison is to make a profit, costs are cut and conditions in the prison become horribly abusive. And because of racist policing, that hammer falls on the black population.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Hey is anyone willing to start a GST about social movement tactics and their successfulness. I want to discuss this more but I'm not knowledgeable enough about the subject to make a good op.
So yeah I think I'm done with Hulkster. It's not even worth making fun of him at this point.
Lots of stuff to make fun of Hulkster on, but "All Lives Matter" on its face seems like a natural response, and it isn't until you are aware of the extent of disparity that you understand that, yeah, all lives should matter, which is why we HAVE to state that black lives matter, because there are many people in power and in the majority who don't exactly feel that way or do anything to affirm that fact.
Many people far more tolerant and progressive than "he of the pythons" here have fallen into the same trap - I think it is more ignorance than willful racism.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+8
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
All lives matter is actually a fine response to the atrocities of racism. If that was the hashtag attached to the blacklivesmatter tweets it would communicate that the black livee are being devalued but certainly should not be.
Not saying it is better or worse - BLM is probably a bit better because it instantly links to issues of blacks people and racism.
However, given that it wasn't used all lives matter isn't a useful clarification but it rarely seems malicious.
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
All lives mattter is a fine sentiment but kind of a poor slogan; it's too vague. Actually to me it brings to mind an anti-abortion campaign more than anything else.
+2
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
Well, pro-life could well be an anti-death penalty position.
It all depends on how it catches on in the populace.
Saying "all lives matter" in response to a news story of a black man being killed by the cops communicates the same things.
Black lives matter is more useful early on. It is important to note that black lives matter isn't an exclusionary sentiment in almost any context.
All lives matter is actually a fine response to the atrocities of racism. If that was the hashtag attached to the blacklivesmatter tweets it would communicate that the black livee are being devalued but certainly should not be.
Not saying it is better or worse - BLM is probably a bit better because it instantly links to issues of blacks people and racism.
However, given that it wasn't used all lives matter isn't a useful clarification but it rarely seems malicious.
All Lives Matter is the retort critics of BLM use to try and discredit them. It absolutely is used with malicious intent.
Vanguard on
+15
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
edited September 2015
I dont want to get into a whole thing with you about what does and doesn't constitute malice, but that is where this is going. Suffice to say that short sightedness, incompetence and ignorance may be destructive but it isn't malicious.
Apothe0sis on
+2
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I dont want to get into a whole thing with you about what does and doesn't constitute malice, but that is where this is going. Suffice to say that short sightedness, incompetence and ignorance may be destructive but it isn't malicious.
And I don't think that short-sightedness, ignorance, and incompetence are the only motivations behind using All Lives Matter. I don't imagine I would have to spend very long on Twitter or combing the news to find virulent racists spewing this nonsense and I have no problem calling that malicious.
Vanguard on
+4
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Let's also not forget about the related #CopLivesMatter which could be described as malicious and victim-blaming
+5
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Whether naming/associating a political movement with a hashtag is a good idea is a whole seperate issue. But regardless of the slogan, I think the operative point is that, for good or for ill, BLM is focused on changes that are meant to fix problems for black people in America, not all people. That is fine, but I think it is very important to recognize that a push to end a policy which harms black people disproportionately but helps people in th aggregate (like broken windows policing which puts black people at risk but also lowers crime) needs to overcome the "all lives matter" argument. Ending the policy may only make sense if you choose to favor one group over society as a whole, and that is a major hurdle BLM must overcome. Things like body cameras and better police training are easier sells because they benefit everyone, even though they benefit black people disproportionately.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Whether naming/associating a political movement with a hashtag is a good idea is a whole seperate issue. But regardless of the slogan, I think the operative point is that, for good or for ill, BLM is focused on changes that are meant to fix problems for black people in America, not all people. That is fine, but I think it is very important to recognize that a push to end a policy which harms black people disproportionately but helps people in th aggregate (like broken windows policing which puts black people at risk but also lowers crime) needs to overcome the "all lives matter" argument. Ending the policy may only make sense if you choose to favor one group over society as a whole, and that is a major hurdle BLM must overcome. Things like body cameras and better police training are easier sells because they benefit everyone, even though they benefit black people disproportionately.
There wouldn't be an argument if people didn't use All Lives Matter exclusively to belittle that movement. BLM doesn't need to do shit; people need to think for two fucking seconds about the context that this slogan exists in.
The proper response to someone putting out the glib #AllLivesMatter hashtag is: "Of course all lives matter, but why do black lives seem to matter so much less"?
Or alternately: "A world where BlackLivesmatter will be a world where AllLivesMatter".
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
+3
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
The proper response to someone putting out the glib #AllLivesMatter hashtag is: "Of course all lives matter, but why do black lives seem to matter so much less"?
Or alternately: "A world where BlackLivesmatter will be a world where AllLivesMatter".
These are fine, reasonable responses to, in my experience, unreasonable people. They often don't even believe this is a legitimate problem.
+6
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Whether naming/associating a political movement with a hashtag is a good idea is a whole seperate issue. But regardless of the slogan, I think the operative point is that, for good or for ill, BLM is focused on changes that are meant to fix problems for black people in America, not all people. That is fine, but I think it is very important to recognize that a push to end a policy which harms black people disproportionately but helps people in th aggregate (like broken windows policing which puts black people at risk but also lowers crime) needs to overcome the "all lives matter" argument. Ending the policy may only make sense if you choose to favor one group over society as a whole, and that is a major hurdle BLM must overcome. Things like body cameras and better police training are easier sells because they benefit everyone, even though they benefit black people disproportionately.
There wouldn't be an argument if people didn't use All Lives Matter exclusively to belittle that movement. BLM doesn't need to do shit; people need to think for two fucking seconds about the context that this slogan exists in.
Even if no one ever said "all lives matter" BLM would still face the substantive issue of pushing for changes specific to black issues at the cost of new issues for people as a whole. BLM can either choose goals that benefit everyone while addressing their issues, like police training, body cameras, and IA reform or they can focus on goals like ending broken windows policing which the majority may view as a mistake because of heightened crime. So far BLM is taking both tactics. I personally think the former is the better tact because changes that are good for everyone will obviously be easier to get majority support for.
Guys! We are really cluttering up this thread. If no one is going to take me up on the offer of a GST then can we focus on how BLM can possibly get their points enacted? Like a discussion about something other than their hashtag.
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Even ignoring the effectiveness or lack thereof of Broken Windows Policing, I'm not on board with your assumption that a benefit for black Americans is a loss for everyone else.
However, even if that was the case, then it would still represent a correction toward equality. What if a hypothetical panel of expert economists, sociologists, historians, and other experts proved conclusively that the only way to end racism and the effects of racism was to levy a 5% income tax on all white income over a certain amount for the next 100 years? That is, what if the solution to this problem does end up taking the form of a hardship, however severe, to those currently benefiting most from the status quo? To be opposed to it would rely on either denying that racial disparity is a thing or arguing that it is the way things ought to be.
I dont want to get into a whole thing with you about what does and doesn't constitute malice, but that is where this is going. Suffice to say that short sightedness, incompetence and ignorance may be destructive but it isn't malicious.
...we're going here again.
Look, if you want to be ignorant of what's going on around various phrases and such, that's your choice. But when it gets pointed out to you that "hey, that phrase actually has a lot of assumptions and baggage built in that you need to consider", it's not being done for shits and giggles. You cannot separate All Lives Matter from the fact that it has been used as an attempt to dismiss the arguments and criticism of BLM.
Even ignoring the effectiveness or lack thereof of Broken Windows Policing, I'm not on board with your assumption that a benefit for black Americans is a loss for everyone else.
However, even if that was the case, then it would still represent a correction toward equality. What if a hypothetical panel of expert economists, sociologists, historians, and other experts proved conclusively that the only way to end racism and the effects of racism was to levy a 5% income tax on all white income over a certain amount for the next 100 years? That is, what if the solution to this problem does end up taking the form of a hardship, however severe, to those currently benefiting most from the status quo? To be opposed to it would rely on either denying that racial disparity is a thing or arguing that it is the way things ought to be.
Identification of a solution and support of a solution are different things. If that was found to be the solution then the challenge would be getting the majority to agree to take on that hardship. BLM wouldn't have any sort of entitlement to have it enacted.
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+2
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
To be fair, a chant like that is pretty awful and counterproductive. It doesn't make them a hate group, of course, but this is exactly the kind of thing BLM needs to avoid. If the narrative is war with the police, not ending police violence against black people, then they have already lost IMO.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
When we were stuck on the role of allies I almost brought this into the topic. The protest that this occurred in was largely white, which reads more as a protest against the police shoehorned onto the BLM movement that many of the other protests.
This is also why I put far more stock in Twitter than the national reporting because this is the kind of shit that gets far more airtime and isn't really representative of the movement.
Hasselbeck continues to be the dumbest person on TV.
+1
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
"Racist woman on network with a history of courting racists makes racist statement".
All lives matter is actually a fine response to the atrocities of racism. If that was the hashtag attached to the blacklivesmatter tweets it would communicate that the black livee are being devalued but certainly should not be.
Not saying it is better or worse - BLM is probably a bit better because it instantly links to issues of blacks people and racism.
However, given that it wasn't used all lives matter isn't a useful clarification but it rarely seems malicious.
All Lives Matter is the retort critics of BLM use to try and discredit them. It absolutely is used with malicious intent.
Guys! We are really cluttering up this thread. If no one is going to take me up on the offer of a GST then can we focus on how BLM can possibly get their points enacted? Like a discussion about something other than their hashtag.
Would the Campaign Zero thread be appropriate for the purposes of being a BLM policy application GST? Discussion seems to have fizzled out in there.
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
"Racist woman on network with a history of courting racists makes racist statement".
Yep.
I was actually a little taken aback by the breadth of their assault on BLM. It's like someone swapped their dog whistles with regular whistles but they're just too old to realize the frequency is as audible as it is shrill.
Posts
There's a difference between aggressive and insulting.
EDIT: Sorry ElJeffe, didn't see your post.
Because Minnesota has the largest Somali population in the US.
Well hello there, Mr Post of Exactly the Sort I Just Said Was Not Appropriate!
Why are there so many Somalis in Minnesota of all places?
They're refugees, that's all I know. And they've got a monopoly on department store retail jobs
I haven't seen them associated with BLM activities but I only caught the fringes at the demonstration at the state fair, so maybe they're active? A lot of people accosting others were white
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
It's not going to turn me off of it.
But it's not me you have to turn onto the idea.
It's the ~80% who are indifferent. And in the U.S. if you are indifferent on a topic, any part of a group doing something that appears "bad", violent, or can be painted as such by the media they consume to get their news is going to make them an opponent.
That's going to happen anyway with certain segments in society and the media (Fox News). Fighting for civil rights in America has always been a hard road for the minorities being oppressed, that didn't stop great achievements being made on that front.
Sometimes refugees were resettled in specific states (Bill Clinton's biography speaks of a wave of Vietnamese refugees being assigned to Arkansas during his tenure), or just gravitated towards specific states, like the Laotian communities in Texas.
...80% of the U.S. population is either indifferent to or opposed to BLM?
What is your source for that figure?
I'm not seeing the link to private prisons. Is there one?
And I'm not sure using #BlackTransLivesMatter is a good idea, since it sounds like they're trying to parody BLM (probably not the intent, but that was my initial reaction on reading it).
I think hashtags are the dumbest shit in general, though. Can't wait for twitter to go the way of myspace and geocities.
So yeah I think I'm done with Hulkster. It's not even worth making fun of him at this point.
Lots of stuff to make fun of Hulkster on, but "All Lives Matter" on its face seems like a natural response, and it isn't until you are aware of the extent of disparity that you understand that, yeah, all lives should matter, which is why we HAVE to state that black lives matter, because there are many people in power and in the majority who don't exactly feel that way or do anything to affirm that fact.
Many people far more tolerant and progressive than "he of the pythons" here have fallen into the same trap - I think it is more ignorance than willful racism.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Not saying it is better or worse - BLM is probably a bit better because it instantly links to issues of blacks people and racism.
However, given that it wasn't used all lives matter isn't a useful clarification but it rarely seems malicious.
It all depends on how it catches on in the populace.
Saying "all lives matter" in response to a news story of a black man being killed by the cops communicates the same things.
Black lives matter is more useful early on. It is important to note that black lives matter isn't an exclusionary sentiment in almost any context.
Yeah, I don't know how people miss the implicit "too", but I've been following some of these issues, so...
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
All Lives Matter is the retort critics of BLM use to try and discredit them. It absolutely is used with malicious intent.
And I don't think that short-sightedness, ignorance, and incompetence are the only motivations behind using All Lives Matter. I don't imagine I would have to spend very long on Twitter or combing the news to find virulent racists spewing this nonsense and I have no problem calling that malicious.
There wouldn't be an argument if people didn't use All Lives Matter exclusively to belittle that movement. BLM doesn't need to do shit; people need to think for two fucking seconds about the context that this slogan exists in.
Or alternately: "A world where BlackLivesmatter will be a world where AllLivesMatter".
These are fine, reasonable responses to, in my experience, unreasonable people. They often don't even believe this is a legitimate problem.
Even if no one ever said "all lives matter" BLM would still face the substantive issue of pushing for changes specific to black issues at the cost of new issues for people as a whole. BLM can either choose goals that benefit everyone while addressing their issues, like police training, body cameras, and IA reform or they can focus on goals like ending broken windows policing which the majority may view as a mistake because of heightened crime. So far BLM is taking both tactics. I personally think the former is the better tact because changes that are good for everyone will obviously be easier to get majority support for.
However, even if that was the case, then it would still represent a correction toward equality. What if a hypothetical panel of expert economists, sociologists, historians, and other experts proved conclusively that the only way to end racism and the effects of racism was to levy a 5% income tax on all white income over a certain amount for the next 100 years? That is, what if the solution to this problem does end up taking the form of a hardship, however severe, to those currently benefiting most from the status quo? To be opposed to it would rely on either denying that racial disparity is a thing or arguing that it is the way things ought to be.
...we're going here again.
Look, if you want to be ignorant of what's going on around various phrases and such, that's your choice. But when it gets pointed out to you that "hey, that phrase actually has a lot of assumptions and baggage built in that you need to consider", it's not being done for shits and giggles. You cannot separate All Lives Matter from the fact that it has been used as an attempt to dismiss the arguments and criticism of BLM.
Identification of a solution and support of a solution are different things. If that was found to be the solution then the challenge would be getting the majority to agree to take on that hardship. BLM wouldn't have any sort of entitlement to have it enacted.
Dear god. This is why the movement is needed. Because a national presence with millions of eyes on her can call a movement with these objectives a hate group.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
To be fair, a chant like that is pretty awful and counterproductive. It doesn't make them a hate group, of course, but this is exactly the kind of thing BLM needs to avoid. If the narrative is war with the police, not ending police violence against black people, then they have already lost IMO.
When we were stuck on the role of allies I almost brought this into the topic. The protest that this occurred in was largely white, which reads more as a protest against the police shoehorned onto the BLM movement that many of the other protests.
This is also why I put far more stock in Twitter than the national reporting because this is the kind of shit that gets far more airtime and isn't really representative of the movement.
Hasselbeck continues to be the dumbest person on TV.
"Racist woman on network with a history of courting racists makes racist statement".
Yep.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/200184/campaign-zero-a-ten-point-plan-against-police-brutality
I was actually a little taken aback by the breadth of their assault on BLM. It's like someone swapped their dog whistles with regular whistles but they're just too old to realize the frequency is as audible as it is shrill.