National Guard called into Minneapolis

[dreng3]

The entire issue with the BLM vs ALM is that ALM comes as a reaction to BLM, and usually as a way to dismiss the validity of the people amassing under the banner of BLM.

What is essentially a cry of "We need to protect the vulnerable and downtrodden" is met with a countercry of "We need to protect everybody". The second statement, while true, takes momentum away from the first and seems to oppose the notion that some matters are more severe and should, ideally, be handled first. Let's start by getting police violence against the black community to the same level as it is against the white, and who knows, we might improve the lives of everyone while doing so.

If someone wants to use the name BLM as a reason not to support, they were looking for a reason not to support in the first place.

 

[Houseman]

Maybe, but only if you ignore completely their arguments and actions, and focus solely on the slogan.

Who are "they"? There's no "all lives matter" movement.

 

[ObsidianJones]

*snips*

Some parting words for now.

Think about the advice you're giving if a.) the vast majority on this platform do not understand your message clearly and/or believes it to be a purposefully erroneous one and b.) You're not taking your own advice.

This is myself breaking off communication with you on this topic. Lil Devils X just said good day to you. A good number of people said your arguments are disingenuous and/or accuse you of arguing in bad faith.

Your message has been one continually of softening and tonal policing on our side of this situation. Where is your renewal? Where is your change of message or softening of your current one? Would you changing your name from Houseman to "Residence Inhabiter" make any one of those people more apt to take your same messages a bit more to heart?

Other than that, no malice. Part like Gentlemen.

 

[CaitSeith]

Who are "they"? There's no "all lives matter" movement.

Those who attached the hashtag to arguments that condemn people for speaking up. Whatever they are a movement or not, is irrelevant.

 

[Houseman]

Minorities still have to go to schools that celebrate Robert E Lee, and instead of picking up guns because that's the last straw, they go to Change.org.

Speaking of Change.org, a Cambridge Professor tweeted "white lives don't matter", and got a promotion.
Some people who didn't like that, and went to Change.org to get her fired. That petition has been removed.

See, this is the division I'm talking about. Division directly caused by the unfortunate naming of "Black Lives Matter". This is what I mean when I say it causes more problems than it solves.

I wonder how many new racists were created by all of this? Fighting racism with MORE RACISM doesn't stop racism, it creates and cements it so that it lasts another 100 years into the future.

And especially voting to repeal anti-discrimination laws. That doesn't help either.

Some parting words for now.

You're asking me questions and giving parting words at the same time? Do you... want me to answer those questions? Because if I do, you're not going to be able to respond without "coming back" to the conversation.

I'll answer them anyway:

Think about the advice you're giving if a.) the vast majority on this platform do not understand your message clearly and/or believes it to be a purposefully erroneous one and b.) You're not taking your own advice.

I don't know what advice it is that you think I'm not taking.

I don't believe that ""the vast majority on this platform do not understand my message clearly". I think they understand it perfectly. They just disagree with it. And I think those people are wrong for disagreeing with it. And that's okay. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

A good number of people said your arguments are disingenuous and/or accuse you of arguing in bad faith.

And again, I think those people are wrong.

You don't have to justify breaking off communication with me with "all these other people are doing it!", nor does it mean that I am wrong. That's the appeal to majority fallacy.

Your message has been one continually of softening and tonal policing on our side of this situation. Where is your renewal?

Why should I "renew" anything?

Where is your change of message or softening of your current one?

Why about my message needs to be changed or softened? This is the first I'm hearing of it, and you've not given any reasons as to why anything I've said needs to be 'softened'. It kinda seems like you're just blindly accusing me of hypocrisy without first pointing out where the double-standard is. "OH yeah? You think BLM needs to change their message? WELL WHY DON'T YOU CHANGE YOUR MESSAGE, HUH? HYPOCRITE?!" - is what it sounds like you're saying.

Other than that, no malice. Part like Gentlemen.

*Shakes hand*

Those who attached the hashtag to arguments that condemn people for speaking up. Whatever they are a movement or not, is irrelevant.

Looking at twitter, #AllLivesMatter is currently being tweeted by Indian people speaking out about two people, Jayaraj And Fenix, who were tortured to death by the police.


They want the same justice for them as for George Floyd. They want the same police reform.

Oh, but whoops, they're just a bunch of racist bigots who are trying to take momentum away from Black Americans with their Indian problems. Hey, wait your turn! First we solve America's issues, then we solve India's issues! That's how it works! We'll get to you in due time, so sit down and shut up, right?

See, this is one of the problems with the name. It's specific to one group and exclusionary to others. Indians can't use it to protest police brutality in their country. White people can't use it to protest police brutality against white people. Nope, it's black people first, everyone else later.

If the name had just been "police reform now" or something... if only.

 

[CaitSeith]

Those who attached the hashtag to arguments that condemn people for speaking up. Whatever they are a movement or not, is irrelevant.

Looking at twitter, #AllLivesMatter is currently being tweeted by Indian people speaking out about two people, Jayaraj And Fenix, who were tortured to death by the police.

Did they condemn people for speaking up? No? Then I'm not referring about them. I'm referring about people who don't use the phrase "All lives matter" as a parallel, but as opposition.

 

[Houseman]

Did they condemn people for speaking up? No? Then I'm not referring about them. I'm referring about people who don't use the phrase "All lives matter" as a parallel, but as opposition.

Oh okay.

Then in that case, yes, if you only look at pro-police people using the slogan, then it'll appear that the slogan is pro-police.

I don't think that this means that nobody but pro-police people should use the slogan anymore than rioters using the BLM slogan should mean that BLM itself should disband.

 

[Kwak]

Maybe those 'Bigots' just want equality for all.

 

[Agema]

The entire issue with the BLM vs ALM is that ALM comes as a reaction to BLM, and usually as a way to dismiss the validity of the people amassing under the banner of BLM.

What is essentially a cry of "We need to protect the vulnerable and downtrodden" is met with a countercry of "We need to protect everybody". The second statement, while true, takes momentum away from the first and seems to oppose the notion that some matters are more severe and should, ideally, be handled first.

Yes. The entire point of ALM is to oppose and delegitimise BLM. It has merely adopted that ostensibly positive, euphemistic name for marketing purposes.

 

[Houseman]

Okay, be sure to post that comic in response to the people trying to use that hashtag to get justice for a man and his son who were tortured to death by cops in India, tweeted ~5 minutes ago from the time this was written:


Be sure to tell them that they're just trying to oppose and delegitimize BLM

 

[Kwak]

Okay, be sure to post that comic in response to the people trying to use that hashtag to get justice for a man and his son who were tortured to death by cops in India, tweeted ~5 minutes ago from the time this was written:


Be sure to tell them that they're just trying to oppose and delegitimize BLM

No, it's clearly for the people who have never before thought about or had any concern for police brutality, until it was brought to their attention by the minorities constantly affected by it.
If they were protesting against police brutality before BLM, then they're probably not just reactionary contrarian arseholes.

 

[Houseman]

No, it's clearly for the people who have never before thought about or had any concern for police brutality, until it was brought to their attention by the minorities constantly affected by it.
If they were protesting against police brutality before BLM, then they're probably not just reactionary contrarian arseholes.

That's the problem with slogans. It's a shortcut in thought. If you're (plural) convinced that a slogan is racist, you're just going to assume whoever is saying it also racist. You don't think "I wonder why that person is saying "All Lives Matter". Let me engage him in conversation to learn his true beliefs" you just go "RACIST TRYING TO DELEGITIMIZE BLACK PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE" and stop thinking.

And people like these Indians, innocently using the phrase to seek justice, are caught in the crossfire because people can't think past what they've been programmed to believe about the slogan.

Instead of being united against police brutality, you're now divided and bickering amongst yourselves over whose color "matters". Good job. Slow clap. Your enemies couldn't have come up with a better plan to sabotage the movement.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

That's the problem with slogans. It's a shortcut in thought. If you're (plural) convinced that a slogan is racist, you're just going to assume whoever is saying it also racist. You don't think "I wonder why that person is saying "All Lives Matter". Let me engage him in conversation to learn his true beliefs" you just go "RACIST TRYING TO DELEGITIMIZE BLACK PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE" and stop thinking.

And people like these Indians, innocently using the phrase to seek justice, are caught in the crossfire because people can't think past what they've been programmed to believe about the slogan.

Instead of being united against police brutality, you're now divided and bickering amongst yourselves over whose color "matters". Good job. Slow clap. Your enemies couldn't have come up with a better plan to sabotage the movement.

...that *was* the enemy's plan to sabotage the movement, and the only people causing an argument are concern trolls just JAQing off about the slogan.
But sure: you win. If we ignore context, history, demonstrable actions, and politics, All Lives Matter makes for a better slogan than Black Lives Matter in an absolute alien vacuum.

And the point of this was...?

 

[Houseman]

...that *was* the enemy's plan to sabotage the movement

Did "the enemy" choose the name #BlackLivesMatter? No, they didn't. If anything they exploited a weakness.

So it's your (plural) own fault for choosing such a bad name. Nobody told you to build an exhaust vent that leads straight to the core of the Death Star.

Actually, that's what you (plural) get for not thinking ahead and seeing this outcome at the beginning. The name is exclusionary, and discriminatory. If you get blowback for being exclusionary and discriminatory, that's your own fault.

But sure: you win. If we ignore context, history, demonstrable actions, and politics, All Lives Matter makes for a better slogan than Black Lives Matter in an absolute alien vacuum.

That's all I ever wanted to hear.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Did "the enemy" choose the name #BlackLivesMatter? No, they didn't. If anything they exploited a weakness.

So it's your (plural) own fault for choosing such a bad name. Nobody told you to build an exhaust vent that leads straight to the core of the Death Star.

Actually, that's what you (plural) get for not thinking ahead and seeing this outcome at the beginning. The name is exclusionary, and discriminatory. If you get blowback for being exclusionary and discriminatory, that's your own fault.

All Lives Matter folks are mad at the message, the actions, and the protesting against police brutality. The name thing is what they have to pull out after people mention that the All Lives Matter crowd is pro-"police stamping on people's heads for not respecting cops enough"
It's the lowest of fruit and nobody actually cares about the slogan by itself outside of pedantic nerds on the internet.
Because this is what All Lives Matter means:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...confront-black-lives-matter-event-bethel-ohio

Protesting a Juneteenth celebration

Anyway, cops are still rioting: Richmond cops firing flashbangs and teargas into not only protesters, but the cars of non-protesters just trying to get through downtown. We're up to 660+ documented incidents starting from George Floyd that All Lives Matter advocates don't give a shit about

And one for the Free Speech Advocates. I notice that the usual suspects on Twitter are rather silent

 

[Houseman]

All Lives Matter folks are mad at the message, the actions, and the protesting against police brutality. The name thing is what they have to pull out after people mention that the All Lives Matter crowd is pro-"police stamping on people's heads for not respecting cops enough"
It's the lowest of fruit and nobody actually cares about the slogan by itself outside of pedantic nerds on the internet.
Because this is what All Lives Matter means:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...confront-black-lives-matter-event-bethel-ohio

Tell that to those seeking justice for Jeyaraj and Fenix because they're not black enough to use the BLM hashtag.


Go ahead, tell them what they really think. Tell them they're pro-police brutality.

 

[lil devils x]

Tell that to those seeking justice for Jeyaraj and Fenix because they're not black enough to use the BLM hashtag.


Go ahead, tell them what they really think. Tell them they're pro-police brutality.

This is such a blatant red herring. Someone not understanding what "ALL lives matter" means and then riding the current media wave focus on it to promote their own cause has ZERO to do with what All lives matter actually means in this context. They are trying to draw attention to their cause, that has NOTHING to do with Black lives matter or ALL lives matter in the context that it is created and used in the US as a counter to Black lives matter. I should not have to point that out to you, you already are aware of this and are doing anything and everything to try to divert the actual attention here from the very serious topic at hand here.

You want to remove the context, meaning of everything stated thus far and steer the topic to a 100% completely unrelated post by someone who is just using the popularity of Black lives matter in the media right now to draw attention to their own cause and are aware you are doing it.
It is pretty obvious by this point you could care less about what black people are actually being forced to endure, as you have shown that by trying to talk about everything from hypothetical alien scenarios to some unrelated guy trying to draw attention to events in India. IT is BS , you know it is BS and yea, you really should be called on it at this point.

AND yea, you can tell him that too, he is likely not going to disagree with it either. It is only you that is trying to change the topic here. Oh and BTW, when you look at the actual skin color of the guys he is saying should not have been brutalized, they are considered " BLACK" in the US as well. BLACK =\= African. It is the shade of your skin. There are plenty of dark skinned people from other regions as well, India is not excluded. It is being targeted due to the color of your skin here that is the problem, where you are from has nothing to do with it.

 

[Agema]

Okay, be sure to post that comic in response to the people trying to use that hashtag to get justice for a man and his son who were tortured to death by cops in India, tweeted ~5 minutes ago from the time this was written:

Be sure to tell them that they're just trying to oppose and delegitimize BLM

Given the loss / change of cultural context across borders, especially into a culture as distant and different from the West as India, I don't think can make a valid point. "BLM" will have virtually no meaning or relevance to a country that is almost entirely absent of black people.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Tell that to those seeking justice for Jeyaraj and Fenix because they're not black enough to use the BLM hashtag.


Go ahead, tell them what they really think. Tell them they're pro-police brutality.

The All Lives Matter crowd isn't going to help them
The All Lives Matter crowd is pro-cop.
The All Lives Matter crowd doesn't give a shit about people like Tony Timpa or Daniel Shaver, not enough to advocate for any sort of change, why do you think they'd care about some foreigners?

You got the only thing you wanted out of this thread. Why're you still here?

 

[Houseman]

Someone not understanding what "ALL lives matter" means

That's funny, because there's a certain group of people out there who object to the use of "all lives matter" because they've redefined those three words so that they become "racist", and "pro-police". It seems like these people are the ones who don't understand what "all lives matter" means.

They are trying to draw attention to their cause, that has NOTHING to do with Black lives matter

Oh, so you admit that BLM isn't about stopping police brutality?

you already are aware of this and are doing anything and everything to try to divert the actual attention here from the very serious topic at hand here

So police brutality in India isn't a serious topic, but police brutality in America is?

Oh and BTW, when you look at the actual skin color of the guys he is saying should not have been brutalized, they are considered " BLACK" in the US as well.

A quick Google search does not agree with your findings, unless we want to time-travel back to the past when there was only "white" and "colored".

"BLM" will have virtually no meaning or relevance to a country that is almost entirely absent of black people.

Then how did they know about it? Why did they specifically reference George Floyd by name, in their tweets? Why did they say "we backed you for him, now it's your turn to back us up"? They even made a comic about it comparing the two situations, with a cop kneeling on both of their necks at once. They have pictures of all three of their faces side-by-side. I think they know what it's about.

You might be able to make the argument that Indians in India aren't aware of how #AllLivesMatter is being used by "pro-police" people. But again, that's what you get for making such a poor slogan. You have to redefine and explain how "black lives matter" really means "police reform now", and how "all lives matter" really means "pro-police brutality racism is okay", and people unaware of this doublespeak, words-don't-mean-what-they-mean stuff will look at you like you've lost your marbles. If you had just said what you really meant from the beginning, none of this confusion would exist.



Black Lives Matter, when it started, wasn't even about police brutality, you know that right? It started with George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. That wasn't a case of police brutality. So really, the slogan wasn't even made for this, and that's probably why it's out of it's depth now.

The All Lives Matter crowd isn't going to help them
The All Lives Matter crowd is pro-cop.

"All" = "Police"
"Lives" = "Brutality"
"Matter" = "Is good".

Can you see how ridiculous that looks? Can we stop redefining words?

Maybe, just maybe, the media has painted up a false narrative, and you fell for it. Maybe people are actually really using #AllLivesMatter in good faith, by taking the words at face value, people like these Indians. And maybe they aren't pro-police brutality or racist. Maybe they just really do believe that all lives matter, without redefining anything, and would rather chant that, than some divisive, exclusionary chant that only focuses on one race that they aren't a part of. Just, consider that as a possibility.

It would be so much easier if everyone could just say what they mean instead of using slogans as "mental Trojan horses" that don't even properly work unless you're preaching to the choir.

You got the only thing you wanted out of this thread. Why're you still here?

Because people still have a bone to pick with my arguments.