Black Lives Matter thread

Originally posted by Silent Master
I want to see interviews with BLM members, leaders, supporters where they disavow the racism in their group and examples of them kicking the offenders out.

That would be like asking the KKK leadership to give formal interviews and directives, telling the world and their members to stop being racist.

Fundamentally, BLM is a racist organization to its core. It is far more harmful than the contemporary KKK - the number of dead bodies indirectly and directly attributable to BLM is now greater than the number of unarmed black people killed each year by the police. And almost all of them are black people.

Maybe the KKK is super happy about BLM? Seems like BLM is delivering exactly what they want: dead black people and calls to segregate based on race (BLM does it under the guise of "safe spaces for POC"😉.

Holy Shit. BLM is the reinvented KKK. It's a strawman group created by the KKK/white supremacists to undermine black issues, harm the black community, and make black people look as terrible as possible.

Where are the conspiracy theorists? They should be all over this.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Even if true, that wouldn't prevent members or supporters from giving those type of interviews.

Yeah, I suppose so. I think a lot of the leaders, and I personally am inclined to agree, don't view the "racism in their own ranks" as an overriding problem. But clearly that is a difference in POV, one that does seem, like many things in the US, to divide along the party lines in some manner.

Which means they endorse the racism.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Which means they endorse the racism.

That's not how I view it. But it seems unlikely we'd agree on that topic.

It's how it is. if you know that you have racist people in your group and you don't do anything to get them out or disavow their behavior. then you support it.

No, your movement may be so big and separate, and the people within it well hidden and not in places of power, that the mere fact of the existence of racist people within the movement is not a sign of support of the movement overall. There certainly are racist people among conservatives, but just as I disagree with you that BLM is racist because of some racists, I disagree with Democrats when they say all conservatives support racism because there are some among them. That's not sufficient evidence to me for such a large movement. You have to look at the prevalence of racism, the power structures and the actions taken.

Which is not to say that you might not do that and still come to your conclusion that it is racist, but your argumentation doesn't seem convincing to me as it is.

Again, even if the racists are so "well hidden" that the other members/leaders and supporters don't know their names. that doesn't stop them from giving interviews where they disavow and denounce the behavior.

So, where are the interviews?

I don't know if there are interviews of that nature, like I said, I assume people in the movements don't see it as a problem big enough to be addressed proactively, so it properly depends on what questions are asked by interviewers.

But I also don't know who exactly the leaders are you would like to see interviews with. I know there's the founders of the network, though in how far they are in charge of the movement is certainly debatable. At the same time, there's stats where more than 50% of Americans in some form support "Black Lives Matter", which just speaks to the scale and decentralized nature of this movement.

If they don't view racism from their group as a problem. well, that says it all

Originally posted by Silent Master
It's how it is. if you know that you have racist people in your group and you don't do anything to get them out or disavow their behavior. then you support it.

Yup. 👆

Originally posted by dadudemon
Take your time digesting this info. It's a lot to take in. Statistics not an easy topic and it's frustratingly counter-intuitive at times.

That data finally "sank in" when I saw a simulation of how money can concentrate into one particular group's hands with only a slight advantage, over time.

When you can visualize what happens to the money, over time, then you really understand what's going on. Since Jews are equipped with the highest educational attainment in the world, they have access to the "latest and greatest" knowledge. So they will be over-represented in industry that they choose. I can see this first hand among Mormons: we are over-represented as doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Because it is literally in our teachings to seek after the knowledge of the universe as it helps us know the mind of God which is a holy pursuit. I bet you devout Mormons have the highest educational attainment of any religious group in the world even when controlling for piety among other religions and atheism. It's that big of a deal in "Mormon church." And my Jewish palls report a similar push to get higher education.

Maaaaan, now you're making me wish I would go talk to my old friends. The best laughs I had growing up was when we'd make fun of each other's religions. It's kind of like the "want to know how I know you're gay?" game but it's zingers for Jews and Mormons, instead. 🙂

Related question:

What about the over representation of lgbtq in visual media?

It's pretty undeniable a ot of such actors are in Hollywood. Or that many became big shot directors or producers.

So is the explanation for this the same thing, or is something else going on there?

Originally posted by cdtm
Related question:

What about the over representation of lgbtq in visual media?

It's pretty undeniable a ot of such actors are in Hollywood. Or that many became big shot directors or producers.

So is the explanation for this the same thing, or is something else going on there?

I think there's two main aspects at play, one that gay people are more drawn to the performing arts generally. Art is a good outlet for marginalized people, we can see that in the immense impact black culture had and has on US culture over all. Basically people that don't fit in like to express that in some way, if they have the option. Additionally these communities are more accepting to them as well (partly probably because there are more gay people there due to reason 1), but also because there is a societal exception made for performers, artists and especially celebrities. They are different, and are allowed societally to be different, in ways that "normal" people may not be.

Originally posted by Artol
I don't know if there are interviews of that nature, like I said, I assume people in the movements don't see it as a problem big enough to be addressed proactively, so it properly depends on what questions are asked by interviewers.

But I also don't know who exactly the leaders are you would like to see interviews with. I know there's the founders of the network, though in how far they are in charge of the movement is certainly debatable. At the same time, there's stats where more than 50% of Americans in some form support "Black Lives Matter", which just speaks to the scale and decentralized nature of this movement.

So a group that was started to combat racism doesn't see the racism in their group as a big problem. There's a term for that, do you know what it is?

Originally posted by Silent Master
So a group that was started to combat racism doesn't see the racism in their group as a big problem. There's a term for that, do you know what it is?

Oh yeah, I think I know what you mean. “Prioritization“, right?

No

BLM as a group have leaders who are admitted marxists.

I did have me a hearty chuckle:

The letter:

http://hiaw.org/defcon6/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.html

It's cringe you think identifying as a Marxist and joining an organisation mean that organisation is then by default Marxist. Or modern Marxism us the same as Marxism in the 19th century and no development in that school has taken place, it's also cringe to think identifying as a particular school of thought means you are taking the entirety of that school of thought on. Typical online rightists attempt to dehumanise a group... November is coming, let's hope most Americans are better than you Surt. 🙂

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
It's cringe you think identifying as a Marxist and joining an organisation mean that organisation is then by default Marxist. Or modern Marxism us the same as Marxism in the 19th century and no development in that school has taken place, it's also cringe to think identifying as a particular school of thought means you are taking the entirety of that school of thought on. Typical online rightists attempt to dehumanise a group... November is coming, let's hope most Americans are better than you Surt. 🙂

^There's a lot of coping going on here. I hope an e-gang member is around to pretend a valid point was made 🙂

Marxism poisons everything it touches. It’s like a reverse of king Midas — everything it touches turns to shit.