It's almost as if the intent of the argument is to distract from the issues at hand in the interest of maintaining the status quo.
National Guard called into Minneapolis
- Thread starter crimson5pheonix
- Start date
- Status
Nope.
A veteran isn't something you're born as, so no. If it were about some sort of inherent characteristic, like skin color, or sex/gender, then it would be.
As opposed to, what, ending past slavery? Future slavery?
A child is something that a person is for a temporary period of time, and is something that everyone is or used to be, so no.
If it were something like "Black children", then yeah.
I wonder, though, could a charity be sued for discrimination if it's something like "women's only" or "black children only"?
What about the words "don't stop the cops" makes you think that these people are in support of police brutality?
The fact that they're holding a "pro-police" rally at a time when police are engaged in open and brutal violence against sections of the civilian population is a pretty large clue that they're willing to tolerate a degree of police brutality.
I believe that there are mental lines they will not cross, but only because those lines suit them.
I believe that if the killing of George Floyd had not become a global event, they would have quietly found whatever inner justifications were required to make it tolerable. As it is, we have a situation where condemning the killing itself is clearly in their interests, and thus the rhetoric has shifted towards "bad apples", because that is the next line of defence which justifies tolerance.
The point of that quote is that there are genuine evils in American society which create rioting, and that those who failing to confront those evils make rioting necessary.
MLK did not condone rioting. He saw violence as both ineffective and immoral, but he made absolutely no secret as to who was to blame for the plight of black people in America. He wasn't your patron saint of white forgiveness.
Power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.
You don't improve the world with love alone. You don't improve the world with trite appeals to universal benevolence or common concern. You improve the world by taking action, by exercising power. Invoking MLK to justify passivity in the face of injustice or mindless "all lives matter" inclusivity is an atrocious distortion of his position and his legacy. It's disempowering to any kind of racial justice, and unfortunately I suspect that is often the point.
No.
It's incredibly obvious why.
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
The simple fact that these protests started because of police brutality and have been suppressed by police brutality?
IDK, seems pretty obvious to me.
So it's not because of anything they've explicitly said? Okay.
So it's not because of anything they've explicitly said? Okay.
If he didn't condone it, then he didn't believe it was necessary. Things being necessary are condoned. Nobody would condemn people who are stranded in the tundra and eat each-other in order to survive, because what they had to do was necessary.
MLK didn't say that rioting was necessary, he just explained it.
I didn't do any of that. I just said that 'his' slogans weren't specific to any one race.
I'm curious, have people tried? Have they brought up lawsuits that got struck down? Do anti-discrimination laws make exceptions for charities?
I'm not able to find any examples through google as of yet.
So, in other words, nothing about the words themselves?
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
What do you mean nothing about the words?
It's specifically about the words, they're saying "Don't stop the cops" at the exact same time that across the street or just another day in a different protest were being attacked by cops for protesting police brutality.
C'mon it's not even a leap in logic, it's right there, it's not even hiding anything.
Sorry, I don't see how anything about the words themselves, with or without their context, means "I support police brutality". You'll have to explain that one to me, because it seems like you're just doing that "words don't mean what they mean" thing, which is so popular these days.
Let me ask you this. What do you think "Don't stop the cops" means? Does it mean "Don't stop the cops... from committing acts of police brutality?"
Does it mean "Don't stop the cops from saving my family and I from an intruder?" "Don't stop the cops from breaking up peaceful protests?" Does it mean "Don't abolish the police, we actually need them"? What?
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
Obviously, they aren't being subtle about this, to claim otherwise is to be disingenuous, they themselves have attacked the BLM protestors, and to use your logic.
Exactly what does it mean?
If they didn't want to come off as oppressing the other movement why isn't their slogan "We support police regulation to stop racial inequality but we don't believe getting read of police is an actual solution" or whatever, I'm sure someone in marketing can come up with a slogan that communicates exactly that in a more concise manner that doesn't leave room for interpretations like the ones I highlighted in your post.
They left it open on purpose, and it's supposed to imply exactly all of the things you mentioned wanting one ore the other isn't really mutually exclusive.
Oh, did they? Are you sure? How do you know that? Did you ask them?
Because in the video, at 0:42, a guy says "you defend the police, what's gonna happen, the gangs are going to take over the neighborhoods"
So it seems like they don't want the cops to be stopped from keeping the gangs from taking over the neighborhoods. That's straight from the horses mouth.
Last edited:
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
Oh, you mean the people that are being super-pedantic about the supposed racism of the BLM slogan didn't think that their slogan could be misinterpreted to mean something really negative?
In any case no I didn't, but it's obvious from the way they are using that ambiguity to defend themselves, despite complaining about the lack of the implied too in BLM, even they didn't bother to clarify their intentions with this one, in any case it's quite telling that they don't apply the same logic to their slogan as they do to the one they disagree with.
That's just me, I'm the only one being super-pedantic about the supposed racism of the BLM slogan. Are you projecting my opinions onto those people in that video? Please don't. There's no indication that they share my views about anything, nor is there any indication that they disagree with, let alone recognize, the supposed racism of the BLM slogan.
No, it's not. You can use that non-argument for anything.
"Black Lives Matter!" = "It's obvious that, from the way they only reference Black lives, that they don't care at all about Caucasian, Hispanic, Chinese, Laotian, etc... lives"
"Stop the cops!" = "It's obvious that, given the current political climate, that they want to just have local gangs provide law and order"
"Kanye 2020!" = "It's obvious, from the way he says it, he really wants Total Recall back on Netflix"
If you think it's obvious, fine, but that's not an argument. You should have some proof or evidence beyond what you think.
But they did. In the video, at 0:42, a guy says "you defend the police, what's gonna happen, the gangs are going to take over the neighborhoods"
That's what their intentions are. They don't want that to happen.
If that’s how All Lives Matter was used, I’d be all for it.
That is not how All Lives Matter was used. It was used by White Supremacist to pretend that other races aren’t treated different and should be targeted
It can’t be about equality until you deal with that. If you want it to be a rallying cry, make it so it is about equality, not about punching down. Then I’ll join you.
BLM is similar to the term Feminist. It originally was just about females getting equality and then became about everyone getting equality. The term migrated to cover more. Mainly because of what I already stated about ALM
Until then, IMO, ALM is more divisive and destructive than BLM. I’m going to use the one that does the least damage and is more about equality
It IS being used that way. Like I said, go search twitter for #AllLivesMatter. Look at all these black people marching and chanting All Lives Matter:
But this doesn't count for some reason because, what, they're all white supremacists?
Your argument is the equivalent of saying "A gun was used to murder someone once, so all guns are being used to murder people", or "Nazis used the swastika, so therefore, nobody can ever use one in any context, ever again", and yet...
You are ascribing motives and arguments to people based, not on what they say, but on the opinions of people who've said the same words at an earlier point in time.
In other words, to you, it's not about the words themselves, but the opinions held by the people who first said those words.
White supremacist, 3 months ago: "I love eggs!"
Black person, today: "I love eggs!"
You: "You're a White Supremacist because you said that thing that the White supremacist said three months ago!"
No, he meant what he said, he just loves eggs.
Last edited:
The idea that there is always an exception so empirical reality is less important than an overly literal and blunt logic is such a horrific way of understanding things. BLM was a movement formed in response to police brutality multiple years ago and the All Lives Matter slogan only comes up when BLM becomes prominent in the news. It is regularly found alongside appeals to protect “Blue Lives,” showing that for many people who care about this slogan, likely the majority, their issue is not that a category is being emphasized but what category is being emphasized. For a smaller portion it exists alongside the slogan that “White Lives Matter,” but emphasizing the use of the term by literal Nazis is perhaps a strawman. It exists as the same obvious reversal as George Lincoln Rockwell’s appeals to White Nationalism, White Power, and White Pride. An obvious and empty bit of sophistry.
The ultimate truth is that in its actions BLM is a movement against police brutality for all, even if it is less obvious in its slogans. It stands alongside the lives of those who are not black regularly and shows solidarity with the oppressed no matter their race, much like the Panthers and MLK did decades ago. On the other hand, ALM isn’t a movement, it’s a reactionary slogan used by anyone wanting to counter protest BLM. It stands for no one and is pointless outside of its existence as an empty slogan to chant at uppity minorities.
And I personally don’t think for all of them it really is about hating black people. For most, it’s about believing that the only racism left in the world is the personal racism of particularly wicked men. That no movement needs to protect black lives because they are only under the same random threat as any other life, no matter the inaccuracy of that statement.
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
[/quote]
Ok, that's fair.
You do realise you have already been shown the evidence in the form of videos, articles and tweets throughout this thread, which you keep denying for whatever reason, do you really want me to re-post those videos again.
They've also stated their dislike of the BLM movement, they've been shown attacking them and basically promoting violence, which again while the statement above might be true it's not part of the slogan and it doesn't make that the only cause of the movement, like I said before they're not mutually exclusive.
Also going by that logic a lot of people of the black lives matter have shown support by saying all lives matter in video as well as claiming they want equality, does that not make your argument quite hypocritical by using a single person example in that video, in which BTW the guy in 0:25 mark claims that what's being reported in the news is fake news, basically claiming the BLM is protesting a problem that doesn't exist, of course the guy at the 02:50 mark contradicts this, but it simply proves that both groups exist within this protest, that being said he's minimising the gravity of the racial violence issue by claiming it doesn't really happen often despite all evidence pointing to the contrary, but whatever the one guy said what you wanted so that stands for the whole movement.
Look man you can believe whatever you want but these people are refusing to acknowledge the gravity of the violence being committed and while it's clear that a significant number of them have good intentions it's also clear that a significant number of them do not, it's similar to what they fail to realise about the police really, that there's such a significant number of bad actors involved that it has tainted the movement as a whole., due to this the slogan "Don't Stop the Police", means both things, we want to preserve law and order and we don't really care about the unjust acts of violence, not all people using it mean both things but unfortunately that's what it means, whether they like it or not.
In any case, I'm not one engage in super long discussions in the Internet normally but as a Mexican living in my own country I feel it's important to acknowledge my perspective on the movement.
So why I think Black Lives Matters has been great, it's because it shows that it's possible to achieve these changes through protest, here in México we have a very complicated relationship with the government, there have been countless protests some of which I have participated on but I stopped, because it feels pointless and frustrating and it's tiring as hell, not to mention that by participating you're making yourself a target for the police, and you know it sucks and I gave up, but seeing this, the worldwide attention it has received that fact that so far it looks like it might make a difference, it makes me feel like maybe one of these days our voices will be heard in the same manner, however I think trying to ride their wave would be a bad idea, it would unfocused the cause and dilute the message possibly reducing the impact that it can have, to be honest I'm really hoping it's successful, you know, it'll show everyone that it can be done.
I'm getting this weird feeling that the "few bad apples" may be the whole bunch. Anyone else?
- Status