Do you support The Black Lives Matter movement?

[UnknownGagsUser]

[nightdrot]

Answered this question elsewhere. At length, the answer is No, but mostly because "Black Lives Matter" is really little more than a group of people following a trendy slogan masquerading as serious thought. Where it is more substantive it tends to the extreme and is not so much the pursuit of justice as the catharsis that comes with seeking vengeance.

Thus for example, Black Lives Matter's recent craze to "defund the police." This is patently self-destructive where it is not simply absurd. Indeed, it was not 30 years ago that African-American community leaders were demanding a stronger police presence in minority communities as crime rates - as a result of the 1960s/70s passion for treating the criminal as a victim rather than a perpetrator - soared.

Indeed, thus how the nation got to its' current fits of moral exhibitionism and self-pity. The increased police presence of the 1980s, 90s and early 2000s brought crime rates down to levels that had not been seen since the peaceful placid 1950s. Now relatively secure and safe, many in those communities began to take their safety for granted and found the means to such safety as intolerably oppressive and racist.

Thus the cries of institutional racism and the theatrical protests in the streets that have now conduced to violence. It is feeling substituting for facts as the data show that, by far, most crime in the African-American community is black on black, that whites are far more likely to suffer police brutality than are black and indeed that in 2019, the last year that full statistics are available, that a grand total of 10 African-Americans were shot by white police officers.

All this against a background where, until the recent pandemic, the unemployment rate among African-Americans had fallen to its' lowest level since statistics for that demographic began to be kept in 1947. This also in a country that had not so long ago elected and re-elected its' first African-American President. A thing that would have been impossible had it depended upon African-American votes alone.

No matter, particularly in a populist age where the common man is fancied the pinnacle of all virtue and where self-pity is at a premium, the conclusion has been drawn that America is irreducibly racist and African-Americans are oppressed - the latter also playing off the virtue and cachet that comes with being classified a victim. This then leading to an extremism that is profoundly silly where it is not profoundly self-destructive.

Thus Black Lives Matter recently called for the abolition of the traditional family. This ignoring the fact that African-American children are, by far, the most likely to be born out of wedlock and raised by single mothers. The social pathologies that flow from that to follow - including higher illiteracy, a greater chance of criminal activity, drug addiction and so on.

Of course, instantly it will be argued that there is racism in America, as the recent Minneapolis episode illustrates. Actually, that is slipshod language. Bigotry there is. Racism, on the other hand, is a schematic ideology and is comparatively rare.

No matter, human beings are imperfect and imperfectible and if the expectation is that there will be no justice or peace until perfect racial harmony is achieved, the wait is apt to be a very long one. Indeed, it will come at the cost of the very social stability that the African-American community needs if it is to overcome the maladies that afflict it and are, by far, the primary source of its' grievances.

So Black Lives Matter is the drivel that is left behind when slogans substitute for thought and emotion replaces analysis. It being further aggravated by a supine culture that prizes moral exhibitionism and "virtue signalling" over the hard work and inevitably imperfect outcomes that will facilitate real social improvement.

[honestGUY45]

An intellectual litmus test... I'd say if you can read this and understand it, you're less likely to support the 'bowel movement'.

[Hypnos0929]

"Indeed, it was not 30 years ago that African-American community leaders were demanding a stronger police presence in minority communities as crime rates - as a result of the 1960s/70s passion for treating the criminal as a victim rather than a perpetrator - soared."

I stopped here because I'd like to point something out. The black community has never been in favor of increasing police presence that isn't black controlled. When the Black Panther Party was established one of their main goals was to act as a black community police force and watchmen because of how bad the police actually were. Furthermore after the Rodney King riots, in 92, there was a push to give black people our 2nd amendment rights back but instead of doing so we were told they, the state and white people, would rather have the national guard come in (sound familiar?).

[John_Doesnt]

"little more than a group of people following a trendy slogan", so the global protests are just a little group to you?

[nightdrot]

@Hypnos0929 Sorry, not so. The Congressional Black Caucus actually did make specific requests for both mandatory minimums and an increased police presence. This how the Democrats ended up adopting both.

(Personal aside, I worked in Congress and was there as it sought both in the Crime Bill eventually signed by President Clinton. My boss was ranking on the Crime Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee at the time.)

In any case, the Black Panther Party hardly represented mainstream views and it would not have been possible to assure them a, for lack of a better term, "Black's Only" police force. This would both not have been possible for legal reasons - including terms negotiated with police and other public sector unions - as well as simple practicalities. (Police, despite recruitment efforts, have not been able to appreciably increase by the necessary quantum leaps the number of black recruits in their ranks.)

In any case, it is not likely that would matter. To start, according to studies by the National Academy of Sciences and the CDC, the overwhelming majority of police brutality claims involving African-American suspects have been lodged against African-American police officers. (8 times the rate of Hispanic or white officers.)

So, you are factually in error, but even were you right there is very little sociological evidence to suggest that a larger African-American police presence would make an appreciable difference. Indeed, the National Academy of Science study also found that, by far, the best predictor of police behavior is suspect behavior.

There the problem begins.

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt Basically yes. The world is experiencing a populist era - see also Brexit in the UK, see also the populist governments in Poland and Hungary, see also the resurgence of Basque and Scottish nationalist movements as other manifestations of the same phenomenon.

The trend is to resist authority. To reject the elites. To define the common man as the pinnacle of all virtue. These are the trendy slogans of the hour and with the United States as the premier global power in any case, the protests fit into that narrative.

To repeat, the data - see also the recent CDC and National Academy of Sciences studies - do not bear out the accusations. This is feeling not reason. Catharsis, not analysis.

[John_Doesnt]

people in other countries are specifically saying "Black Lives Matter" even people in Japan and Korea where the black population is less than %1 are saying "Black Lives Matter".

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt So? Again my point. The protests are not about black lives and racism and all the other things that they purport to be about.

Rather, they are an expression of a global mood of the moment. Populism. Resistance to anything that is perceived as power and authority. Dislike of establishments and institutions and the attribution to them of all manner of sins. As far as the international context specifically, with the US as the premier global power, it is almost a calendar pin-up for populist odium.

Bottom line, this is sentiment and not serious. The protests are manifestations of passion not reason and they have long ago become attenuated from that which allegedly sparked them. Suffice to say, it becomes increasingly difficult - the longer the protests go on, particularly detached from any practical demands save for the patently absurd cry to "defund the police" - to take them seriously.

[John_Doesnt]

The protests are specifically about black people. They're holding up signs of black people that were killed by police.

[honestGUY45]

nightdrot, your answers are too complex for the typical supporter of this movement. Try converting them to emogies or TikTok videos for maximum comprehension.

[nightdrot]

@honestGUY45 Thank you - at least I think - for your kind compliment. As to writing to those in the "Black Lives Matter" movement, I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt as regards their ability to follow my arguments.

Besides, my hunch that the problem would be less one of reading comprehension than one of engaging the mind over emotions. Hence my approach.

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt Really? Then why did protesters in London deface a statue of Abraham Lincoln? What did he ever do for African-Americans.

Do not confuse form for substance. This has gotten about as far from the well being of African-Americans as it is possible to get.

Besides, 82% of all murders of black men is by other black men. Do black lives matter to blacks? There are at least some grounds for doubting.

[John_Doesnt]

the protesters didn't deface a statue of Abraham Lincoln, why would there be a statue of Lincoln in England? Dumbass.
They defaced the statue of a slave owner.

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt Try again.

heavy.com/.../

[John_Doesnt]

the Lincoln statue was not in London dumbass. Lincoln was an American president. Do you need to see a map?

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt One more time. All you need do is read the headline:

www.washingtonexaminer.com/.../black-lives-matter-protesters-graffiti-abraham-lincoln-statue-in-london

[John_Doesnt]

Did you read the part where it said the Lincoln statue is in America?
www.nytimes.com/.../...navirus-trump-response.html

[nightdrot]

@John_Doesnt Did you read this line from the article - "Later in the day, the names of black people who died while in police custody were scrawled on the Lincoln Statue at Parliament Square. The words “we will succeed” were also spray-painted on the statue... The national monument and Lincoln Memorial in Washington were also damaged in protests last week."

Parliament Square is in London - where I have been personally, by the way.

Also, here is a photo from a Twitter feed - note the caption: twitter.com/.../1269296169559130112

Please learn to read and recall that when you are in a hole, the best way to get out is to stop digging. In any case, you can easily confirm this yourself by a Google search.

Here is another: www.newsbreak.com/.../abraham-lincoln-statue-vandalised-and-scaled-in-london-blm-protests

[ayque]

Putting aside the protests, as an experienced political consultant, what do you think could be done better in terms or race equality? Yes, I know there’s no such thing as perfection as well.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Not sure that there is much that could be done that would satisfy the activist community. Obviously you can set up various community liaison programs and such - and this has already been done in many cases. The Trump Administration had already passed sentencing reform and - although it has not gotten much attention - has poured substantial sums of money into historically black colleges. All of this much more than his African-American predecessor ever did - and I say this as no fan of Mr. Trump - and none of it has made much difference.

The origins of the current problem - leaving aside the populist mood of the country which has been hypercharged by social media - is born of the fact that, in response to black community calls, the police presence in African-American communities began to be enhanced in the 1990s. (Famously, if now ironically, it was the Congressional Black Caucus that first called for mandatory minimum sentences for cocaine offenses in the 1980s.)

That presence could be reduced, but as was seen in Ferguson, Cincinnati and west Baltimore, where the police presence has been reduced, crimes rates have soared. (In the west Baltimore case, by an eye bulging 150%.) This in turn producing from the black community cries of police neglect.

It is a heads I win, tails you lose situation and is one of those cases where this is not a problem to be solved but rather is a difficulty to be managed, case-by-case, mostly at the local level. (Indeed, this is legally in any case almost by definition a state and local matter. About the most the Feds can do is reduce Federal aid to states for law enforcement. This would then leave less funding for police training and would as likely make the problem worse as better.)

CONT.

[nightdrot]

There is also a need - bluntly - to hold the African-American community to greater account. During Jim Crow, the black illegitimacy rate was below the national average. Now, 72% of all black children are born to single mothers with no father in the home. As the research shows, children raised with no father in the house are 7 to 12 times more likely to have their own children out of wedlock, to fail in school, to fall afoul of the law, to become drug or alcohol addicted.

This all, in turn, leading to more interactions with the police. That enhanced police presence, in turn, reinforcing the feeling in the black community of police oppression, in an ever downward spiral. This can be marginally offset by restrictions on police methods, but this will be of limited utility. As a recent National Academy of Science study has show, the single greatest predictor of police behavior is suspect behavior. Suspect behavior being rooted primarily in upbringing and education.

Much of the problem currently is the cultural mood. When the common man is the font of all virtue, institutions and authority fall into disrepute and lose respect. As Burke said, "When subjects are rebels from principle, kings will be tyrants from necessity." That overstates the current situation in degree, but not necessarily in kind.

Much of the answer will come with time. The current mood apes the 1960s and 70s. When the nation in general, and the black community in particular, grew weary of mayhem and riots, things mellowed and we got the relative - it is ALWAYS relative - peace and harmony of the 1980s and 90s.

CONT.

[nightdrot]

That pattern will likely repeat itself now. Albeit again it is hard to measure what impact the multiplier effect of the media and technology will have in prolonging the turmoil. Beyond that, the authorities are making a profound mistake in placing the emphasis on empathy over the rule of law, as this will only reinforce the cultural ethos of self-pity and self-righteous indignation.

The authorities would be wiser to take a generally hard line, and then to augment that with reforms of police methods where possible on an almost, as I say, case-by-case, community-by-community basis. It being recognized that this is all apt to be of limited utility so long as the culture rewards a sense of grievance.

Beyond all of this, I could add various particular reforms, but again much depends on local circumstances. Indeed, in NYC, for example, when police hold community forums in black communities, they report that the single most constant demand that they here is for a greater police presence, not less.

Thus the authorities are faced with a contradiction. An enhanced police presence is demanded, but then its succeeds and rather that being appreciated it is viewed as oppressive. It will be very hard to square that circle.

[ayque]

Authorities are probably also going through the same thing the general population is in that society hasn’t quite worked out how to deal with social media, technology and an increasingly diverse world.

[nightdrot]

@ayque There is no doubt, as I suggested above, that there is a technological dimension to this. The irony being that technology has put the world at our fingertips, but has had the perverse effect of satisfying our instinct for instant gratification and hence the habit of living in our own heads.

Communication is always difficult, but it gets many times harder when the same words spoken in the same language take on a different meanings in each individual's mind. Throw in the amplifying effects of the mass media and social media, and it becomes a problem of incredible dimensions.

This indeed why totalitarian states have either banned such technologies - see North Korea - or restricted their use and their sources - see China. Controlling the human mind becomes much easier where the message is uniform and where competing messages are not simply contradicted, but eliminated completely.

There is no doubt, suffice to say, that the nation is managing the transition of the economy from a manufacturing/extractions base to a service/high tech base at the same time that it is attempting to absorb new technologies. The impact of those technologies on the culture and the individual psyche not being fully understood and therefore hard to manage.

That being the case, it is no wonder the nation is facing the turmoil that it is. We have been here before, but never quite this way and in quite this perfect a storm. The assumption of the First Amendment - perhaps too optimistic - was that good ideas would drive out the bad and that debate would conduce to consensus over time.

It was never anticipated that the same words used in those debates would mean different things to different people. This adding a whole new layer of complexity and conflict to the frictions normal to social interaction.

[ayque]

So what’s your Proposed solution for the social media problem?

[ayque]

And how do you think society has dealt with the ever increasingly diverse world?

[nightdrot]

@ayque In answer to your first question, you keep asking for solutions. There are not necessarily answers. Some things are just difficulties that must be managed as best they can be.

The world has dealt with the impact of new technologies before. We tend not to think of it now, but in its day, radio turned the world upside down. Of course, the West was more confident in itself than it is now, but the impacts were profound. Ditto television. The list goes on. Heck, Newton discovered gravity and the world turned upside down.

With time and experience, man and culture adapt. Not completely or perfectly but as well as can be expected from imperfect beings in an imperfectible world. To sit then and say, "what is the solution?" is to by asking the question grossly oversimplify the problem.

Now there are things we can do. Be more careful in our use of language, for example. However, these are apt to be of limited utility except, perhaps, over the very long run.

As to diversity, pretty well, all things considered. In 1860 we fought a war over slavery. Were people of a different race not people but property? 650,000 dead later, we decided they were people - and even then it took another hundred years to fully actualize that in law and practice - social convention taking longer still.

CONT.

[nightdrot]

So what is your metric. Diversity tests our sense of what we are. It can be splintering - see also moral relativism, the easy answer to the challenge of diversity even as it makes the problem more complicated. If my truth is that you are property, how then do you npt acknowledge my truth just because your's is different.

So we are clear on certain principles - for example, that for civilization to thrive there must be order - and then we proceed from there to adpat as circumstance requires.

Bottom line, experience and adaptation will find for us ways to manage diversity and technology. Those solutions will be imperfect and not completely solve the problems and indeed will create their own problems. Such is the way of the world and it will have to suffice.

[ayque]

Perhaps that is just the different ways we use language. In my mind, a solution doesn’t have to be perfect and probably never will be and is the same thing as what you call “a difficulty to be managed”.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, that may be, but solution suggests resolution - solving the issue. Not simply dealing with it and managing it.

Here the use of language matters - speaking of media. We live in a culture that thinks every problem has a solution. Most social and cultural problems are far too complex - have too many causes and origins too murky to ferret out - to allow for solutions. Most of the time, it is time and experience and uneasy and imperfect compromises that lead to tolerable outcomes. Almost never outright solutions.

[ayque]

That culture you describe is deeply engrained within our societies.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Yup. Sure is. Indeed, it is embedded in the language. You may have used the word "solution" as meaning "managing the problem," but we live through the prism of language. When we use words in certain ways, it both reflects and reinforces certain habits of mind.

That is why we must ALWAYS take care in how we use language and use it prudently and with explanations as appropriate. That is something the culture - soused on visual stimulus and given too little to reflection - does not do.

You see it in the current mayhem. You see it in something as simple as the "virtual mob" that went after the young man from Covington, Kentucky. People saw a young man smile and judged it - on the basis of little more than subjective impression - indicative of racism.

A culture that extrapolates such cosmic conclusions from such slender evidence is grossly lacking in self-control and reason. Suffice to say, in such context, the cities burn.

[ayque]

I don’t think the vast majority of people support cities burning, vandalism or violence even if some support the cause.

[nightdrot]

@ayque No, that is not what I said. The problem is that when you have a culture that wallows in subjectivity and self-pity. That prizes feeling over reason and that gives primacy to the visual over the intellectual, it will lack the self-control and self-discipline to resist its' most base impulses.

We did not get to the riots we have absent context and a certain cultural milieu. The majority may object to riots in the abstract, but they are not apt, case-by-case, to give order and reason precedent to how they feel. We did not get where we are by accident.

[ayque]

Yes but what I mean is there will be some people who don’t see a problem with feelings taking over society.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, yes. In fact, that is the prevailing ethos of the hour - and is why you have rioting in the streets. Feeling over intellect. Authenticity over self-restraint.

As I say, we did not get to where we find ourselves by accident.

[ayque]

I don’t think some level of feeling is a bad thing. However, I agree it’s gone too far in many areas.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Feelings are inevitable. Controlling one's feelings, and a society that inculcates the virtues of self-control and self-discipline, are prerequisite to civilization.

[ayque]

Well feelings seem to take over more and more every year.

[ayque]

That was acknowledged in the U. K. by all sides of the political spectrum a couple of years ago. www.google.co.uk/.../high-anxiety-how-feelings-took-over-the-world

[nightdrot]

@ayque That's nice. That is a bit like reinventing the wheel. Savages are ruled by their feelings. Men by their reason. The line became blurred when the idea of the natural - which the ancient Greeks defined as that which conduced to man's highest virtues - became defined by the moderns as that which happens spontaneously.

From there it was a long slow steady slide. The Greeks said that nature must be nurtured. The moderns said that the natural just happened. The latter believing that if law was written in conformance with man's natural rights, spontaneous harmony would follow.

Suffice to say, it has not worked out that way.

[ayque]

Society is reinventing the wheel. Or trying.

[nightdrot]

@ayque The piece you sent is a case of reinventing the wheel. File that one under "duh." We started down this path, actually, long before the timeframe the article highlights, albeit with ebbs and flows, fits and starts.

Mankind is making a mistake that it began making with the Enlightenment - hence my contrast of the ancient Greeks to the moderns.

It has not stopped making that mistake, albeit at an increasing pace, since then.

[ayque]

Humanity has always made the same mistakes throughout history. And generally you see repeating patterns throughout history. But in the long term, things change and progress.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Nope. Progress is NOT foreordained or inevitable. THAT is the premier error of modernity.
The believe that we have the knowledge, tools and wisdom to shape the future because progress is in the nature of things.

No, it is not - and oceans of blood have been spilled to prove the point. "The pursuit of Utopia is the primal madness of the species."

[ayque]

Well you would say that as a Classic conservative.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Yes, and one look at the history of mankind confirms the point.

[ayque]

But Progression has still happened over the long term. And generally it’s been good progression wouldn’t you say? Putting aside the extreme progressions you mention which have failed.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Yes, we invented the internal combustion engine - and used it to throw Jews into ovens. We went from the age of chivalry to the age of Harvey Weinstein.

Such progress.

"The optimist believes we are living in the best of all possible worlds - - - - and the pessimist fears that he is right."

[ayque]

Many new inventions have been exploited for evil purposes but they’ve also been used to advance society over the long term. If we had no new inventions or progression since the start of humanity, we’d be sitting in a cave with no clothes on.

[ayque]

I like your quote. There is truth in that I accept.

[nightdrot]

@ayque On your first point, MY point was that you may improve the technology. You may improve the methods - but you will NEVER improve man. Imperfect he is, imperfect he remains, with all that entails in terms of his capacity for evil.

This is what the optimists lose sight of, and as I say, the price of their optimism has been drenched in blood.

[ayque]

Actually I’m a realistic optimist. Not really a true pure optimist.

[nightdrot]

@ayque The world needs more pessimists who are not defeatists. Optimists by nature have too little appreciation for the law of unintended consequences and for the probability that things can go wrong. In their belief that all will turn out well - which is what optimism is - they ignore the implications of human fallibility and the limits of human knowledge.

[ayque]

Actually I am well aware of all of those things you mentioned. I just choose to be an optimist whilst taking into account the realisms you mention.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That is a contradiction in terms. If you accept that things can go wrong, that the best of intentions can produce unintended negative consequences, and that things are not apt to end well given the limits of human knowledge and human virtue, than you cannot be an optimist.

An optimist, by definition are good and CAN ONLY get better. The pessimist replies, "Don't count on it."

[ayque]

Not really because I don’t agree with your entire statement.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Just because you don't agree with it, does not mean that it is not right.

Explain to me how an optimist - by definition - can assume that some project will go wrong, have unintended consequences and, as often as not, cannot succeed.

The founders of the Great Society programs assumed that man had the knowledge and tools to solve poverty and that poverty was indeed curable. So, on that optimistic premise, they devised all sorts of programs.

Turns out those programs displaced all sorts of civil social institutions and dissolved the bonds of community. Material deprivation did decline somewhat, but poverty was hardly cured, and in the absence of society's intermediary institutions, the sense of community was undermined and crime and other pathologies followed.

All this because the optimists assumed that we could cure poverty.

[ayque]

Because you can be an optimist in general direction but not necessarily by detail. For example, you can have the general idea that things will go well and get better but accept that to get there, mistakes will be made.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Except that in my example it was not a mistake. It was the logical consequence of a misplaced optimism. The belief was optimistic, the programs tailored to address the problem specifically. The problem is that the optimism led people astray - convinced them that was not doable was doable. Many paid the price.

Besides, at this point, you have yourself a definition that does not define. In effect what you are saying is that you are an optimist - except when you aren't.

[ayque]

No I’m always an optimist. But an optimist can still be aware of the lessons of history and moral principles.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Except that you cannot be where prudence dictates that you cannot be. You yourself admitted that things can go wrong - this putting a cap on your optimism.

Forgive me, sir, but at this point, you are turning the English language into a pretzel.

[ayque]

We are now arguing semantics.

[ayque]

But you are right about the optimist with a cap. Hence I refer to it as a realistic optimist.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Nope, not semantics. An optimist, by definition, assumes that things turn out well. So you do - except when you don't.

Realism is pessimistic by nature. The belief that we have some grounds for action but that we are invariably limited in what we can do and how effective we can be in doing it.

[ayque]

Yes I do except when I don’t.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That is not optimism - by definition. Sort of my point.

[ayque]

But I am optimistic when I want to be and generally am more optimistic than pessimistic.

[nightdrot]

@ayque So you believe that poverty is curable, for example?

[ayque]

No I don’t. It’s more that in personal matters, I tend to be more optimistic. Maybe that’s a better way of putting in. In political opinions, I’m probably more pessimistic.

[ayque]

On a different topic, I am interested to hear your views on the tearing down of the statues (the legal ones torn down by the proper authorities, not the cases of vandalism where protesters have torn them down by their own will).

[nightdrot]

@ayque Frankly, I am largely indifferent. I would leave them as reminders of history - this in a culture where history is already given far too short a shrift. I also think that tearing the statues down has a vaguely Stalin-esque feel. Like when Stalin erased Trotsky's image from a photo with Lenin.

However, in general, it is not a matter of great moment. When you live in a country where 4 in 10 cannot name who we fought in World War I, and where more than half cannot name their Member of Congress, tearing down statues is not the most serious problem we have.

It is more symptom than cause - and the cause is chilling.

[ayque]

Could they be put in museums instead?

[nightdrot]

@ayque Sure. That would be a reasonable option. Though those who want them torn down often have an agenda and would rather see them be destroyed.

That said, to the extent that reason and a due consideration of history still has claim on the human mind, sending the statues to a museum would certainly be a desirable option.

[ayque]

All statues? Or do you think some statues should remain in situ?

[nightdrot]

@ayque My preference is that things be left as they are, but as I say, it is not a matter of great moment. The whole statue issue is a symptom of a larger malady. The malady is the bigger issue.

[ayque]

And what are the symptoms and potential consequences of the malady which concern you the most?

[nightdrot]

@ayque Ignorance of history. The tendency to rewrite it so as to erase memories and set an agenda. This is what I was referring to. (Ignorance of history - a failure to learn its' lessons - being a deeply rooted problem in any case.)

Suffice to say, the tearing down of statues is a symptom of that broader social pathology. Those who are ignorant of history being condemned to a perpetual state of intellectual and moral pre-adolescence.

[ayque]

I think very few people would support that on either side of the aisle.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Sorry, the antecedent in your sentence is unclear. To what are you referring? What is "that"?

[ayque]

Ignorance or rewriting of history.

[nightdrot]

@ayque To the contrary. Why did the National Socialists and the Communists burn books. Where does the phrase, "the dead hand of the past" come from?

Particularly on what is referred to as the political left - I will spare you the pedigree of the ideas - the idea is that history ties man to his past and prevents him from reaching his full utopian potential. "He who controls the past controls the present and shapes the future."

Nope, there is a serious strand of political thought that seeks to erase and re-write history to serve the needs of utopian ambition. At its worst, you can see it in North Korea and China - or back in the day in Nazi Germany and the USSR. In milder form, you see it in those groups that are seeking in the name of an ephemeral equality, to tear down representations of the past.

[nightdrot]

P. S. The actual quote from above is, "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." George Orwell's famous quote comes from his justifiably famous science fiction novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four".

[ayque]

I think that is an extreme though and surely not supported by the majority. I doubt moderate liberals would support the complete deletion of rewriting of history.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, it is not moderates who want to tear down statues. In fact, until the current populist era, the statues were left alone and were accepted or ignored according to taste.

After all, not for nothing do such groups want to take the time to tear down these statues.

[ayque]

So do you think moderates have become a minority now?

[nightdrot]

@ayque No. However, intensity matters and at the moment radical factions are taking advantage of the confluence of populist sentiments, economic transformation and new technologies to gain prominence.

This is a fairly recurrent pattern in human history. This time being given more salience be the new technologies of social media.

[ayque]

Doesn’t history also tell us that this will pass? And moderate policies will prevail?

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, the Nazis were a minority. The Communists were also a minority. You cannot be assured of any outcome.

Now I happen to believe that the institutions of the United States are strong and that is reassuring. However, both parties believe there are votes to be had in trashing those institutions and when such institutions are in disrepute, then the danger of anarchy, revolution or tyranny is greatest.

The problem with the current crop of leaders in American is that they have too little an appreciation of how man depends on established social institutions to afford him order and a sense of identity. Absent order and identity, man is a beast who either devours his own or is easily led.

[ayque]

What about in the United Kingdom? Do you think there’s less of a concern there? Or more of a concern?

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, in Britain the same forces are at work as in the United States and the West generally. Though to what degree I cannot say. Scottish and Welsh nationalisms are certainly examples of those attenuating forces of social cohesion.

By the same token, Britain is a country that retains a monarchy, a House of Lords and an established church. The culture tend - and this is a tendency - to give primacy to established cultural institutions and traditions. (It is one of the reasons I an Anglophile.) By the same token, as the Brexit debate suggested, there are forces tearing at that sense of deep institutional and social cohesion for something more erzatz and mechanistic.

That said, while I do follow British politics, I cannot say, at this distance, to what degree those forces of social atomization are a force in British politics.

[ayque]

I fear they are at work more than you might think. Populism in the United Kingdom has become rife recently and feelings have very truly taken over. There is also the same social media and technology problem as in the US. In addition, many in the UK are now less religious.

[ayque]

Support for the monarchy I think is still strong however. The House of Lords many believe should be elected.

[nightdrot]

@ayque The point is that the institutions are adaptable and have endured. It is, for example, amazing that in a country where religious observance has decline to the extent that it has that an established church remains and is not a matter of great controversy. That suggests a deep underlying respect for institutions and traditions that has made British society highly durable and resilient.

By the same token, I did say that the forces of social atomization are at work in the UK. All I could not do was give a specific estimate as to how far they have gone. All I can say is that such atomization is spreading across the West and that there is therefore no reason to believe that it has not impacted the UK.

[ayque]

Yes. I do however feel that respect for tradition and institutions is weakening.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Look about you. You can point to it in ways large and small. From things like the decline of religious observance to something as small as the rising tide of coarse manners and a lack of decorum on public conduct.

However, why are you asking me these things? Look around for yourself. You be the judge. You decide what we have lost and what we have gained and weigh the balance.

[ayque]

I am but I like to hear other views too.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, I think you can fairly extrapolate some of my views. My suggestion to you would be rather than plating 20 questions with me - though within reason I am happy to chat - that you read Aristotle, Aquinas and Burke. That you read more history.

These will give you a better sense of the world you find yourself in than you will get in 2000 character increments from me.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Just to add, my point being that whatever the merits of this site, its' format is too limited to do real justice to either the full historical sweep or the nuances of the topic. You would do better to expand your reading of history and political philosophy.

[ayque]

Yes. And of course reading Books by authors of different biases are important too. For example liberalism vs conservatism, relativism vs objectivism.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That's what I think I said. Certainly you will get more out of the experience than trying to learn bu social media. The former being the font of knowledge, the latter its' crude imitation.

[ayque]

I just heard another view from the left which said that without encouraging political correctness and highlighting issues, the far right will take over.

Certainly politics has a wide range of views.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That is a banality masquerading as a profound thought.

First, at the moment, you may have noticed, is not a question that we are not hearing from all sides. Indeed, to the contrary, you are hearing from every side - via media in all its forms - in a cacophony of sounds that provides, in general, more heat that light.

Secondly, the suggestion that if we do not hear from one side the extremists on the other side will prevail is problematic. In general, one extreme will, in the fullness of time, tend to provoke extremism on the other side.

Bottom line, there was nothing in that person's statement that was especially profound or insightful. Where it was not mistaken, it was simply a cliche.

[ayque]

Yes. A symptom of populism unfortunately. In that the Populist opposition of populists can be viewed as extremists.

[ayque]

Even when they are not.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Sorry. I don't follow what you are trying to say. Please clarify.

[ayque]

I think this person is basing their thoughts on how They believe evil dictators like Hitler came to power.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, I don't know the person and did not talk to him/her, I can neither confirm nor deny that.

All I can say is that, typically, people tend to greatly oversimplify the lessons of National Socialism and how Hitler came to power. However, in this case, since I was not in on your conversation and am not at all clear on how it related to what you wrote about "political correctness" and all the rest, I will have to defer.

You are simply not providing enough information, let alone context, for me to ferret out what you mean let alone what he/she meant.

[ayque]

Yes of course.

The rise of national socialism was complex and as with anything in history, there were numerous factors. However, as you say, this is oversimplified by many.

[ayque]

Well it seems in both the U. K. and US, institutions across the board are agreeing to review their equality policies and break down racial biases. Change is happening through consensus. Very interesting.

[nightdrot]

@ayque What consensus would that be? At this moment you have a whole swath of the city of Seattle under the control of what amounts to an insurgency - demanding the abolition of the police.

You think there is a consensus for that?

At this point, look about you. The state cannot - or will not - protect you. If you are a victim of crime, well... best not call the police.

You are imagining a consensus where one does not exist. The authority of the state is in disrepute and there is NO consensus on what ought replace it. Public officials are bowing to power, not reason.

Thanks, but if that is a consensus, I'll pass.

[ayque]

Well in the U. K. anyway. I shouldn’t have said US. I’m not there so I can’t really judge.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, I can't speak to the UK in any detail, other than to say that if the government bowing to protesters who defaced and in some cases destroyed public property and monuments a "consensus," heaven help you if you reach too many more consensus.

[ayque]

There is no consensus for vandalism or public disorder in the U. K. The majority of the public and institutions are strongly condemning it. There is however consensus for reviewing policies within institutions.

[ayque]

Most protestors in the U. K. have not been violent. It is a small minority here who the vast majority agree are a discredit to the cause.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, if you consider a consensus forged at the point of a gun - which is what the protesters who destroyed public property essentially effectuated - then congrats! You have a consensus.

Hope you don't get too many more that way. Civilization will not long endure it.

Your second posting is irrelevant. In effect, what you are saying is that the small minority prevailed over the majority. Not terribly reassuring.

[ayque]

What I mean is that only a small minority of protestors were not peaceful. Most in the U. K. were peaceful protestors and acted lawfully.

Any review of course should follow the standard governance procedures set out within each institution. There is no consensus for the abolition of any institution here.

[nightdrot]

@ayque They were peaceful here too, but the speedy enactment of "reforms" suggests not a debate defined by reason but reaction forced by passions and violence.

Keep looking in that dung pile for a pony. There is bound to be one in there somewhere.

[ayque]

There are no “reforms” planned here. Only reviews which will then lead to proper debate and establishment of consensus on whether reform should happen and how it should happen, if so.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Great. Then you have something to smile about - as you clean up the rubble.

[ayque]

Those who broke the law should and will be brought to justice.

[nightdrot]

@ayque On the first clause of your sentence, it is to be fervently hoped. On the second, it remains to be seen - though in fairness it is more likely in the UK then it is in the States where mayors and Governors cannot bring themselves to retake their streets. (See again Seattle as Exhibit A.)

[ayque]

I will read about Seattle but if what you say is true, then I pray for you.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Here ya go. From the Guardian, no less:

www.theguardian.com/.../chaz-seattle-autonomous-zone-police-protest

Also from an American news network: www.nbcnews.com/.../seattle-protesters-set-autonomous-zone-after-police-evacuate-precinct-n1230151

[nightdrot]

Oh, and one more - www.foxnews.com/.../seattle-officers-autonomous-zone-911-response-times-tripled

[ayque]

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. That is embarrassing for a world leading democratic society. I will be sure to watch with keen interest on how the US authorities get out of this.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, while hardly flattering, I think the bigger issue is what it says about the authority of the state. The people who paid their taxes in that area and who expected the city to provide certain services and protections have been left to their fate.

This because once a society has decided that feelings and authenticity trump reason and the rule of law, and the common man is the definition of all virtue, this is what you are left with.

Oh, and to add, when you are an optimist about human nature, you then begin to dispense with things like police and law. The common man being spontaneously and reliably good and their being no reason to doubt his purity, law becomes at best dispensable, at worst corrupting and oppressive.

Welcome to Seattle.

[ayque]

I am an optimist more often than not but I would never support the abolition of police or other institutions which hold our democracy together, hold the collective knowledge of humanity (both past and present) and where debate takes place to shape the future of our democratic civilisation.

Perhaps Seattle has weak leadership.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Your last point is obvious but not sufficient as an explanation. That weakness is rooted in faulty thinking and mistaken premises.

Which gets to your first point, which is inconsistent. If man is basically good - as epistemologically optimists must believe - then there is no need for such institutions. Man being basically good, he will govern himself and his relations to his fellow man without the need for shaping and restraining institutions.

[ayque]

It is possible to have a generally optimistic mindset in personal matters but not necessarily in political matters.

It is also possible to sometimes be an optimist and not at other times.

I am sure there are many factors which led to the situation in Seattle which can be debated over.

[nightdrot]

@ayque To your last point, that is not saying much. Obviously.

To your first point, sure you can. That does not, however, make it intellectually or logically consistent.

[ayque]

It is a frame of mind. It does not need to be intellectually consistent.

[nightdrot]

@ayque A frame of mind untethered to reality is not only not consistent. It is positively dangerous. Emotion severed from the bonds of reason.

Sorry, we have had quite enough of that throughout human history - not least the last few days.

[ayque]

Not if you have established foundations on which to base basic principles.

[nightdrot]

@ayque You have no principles except a fervent belief that all will turn out well. Besides, when was the last time you saw such principles consistently followed and adhered to.

Indeed, if people did, we would have no need for laws and institutions. Man would follow such principles spontaneously.

[ayque]

I have principles which the institutions of my society have taught and for which I respect. When was the last time you saw your approach being followed and respected? You can’t stop people being emotional and you can’t force people to follow intellectual reason.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Yes, and I don't expect them to. That is why I am a pessimist. The institutions, laws, ethics and habits of society are the best we have to accommodate human nature and help to shape it. They will not always succeed and will as often as not, they may not even endure. They are to be cherished because they are perishable and are all that stand between us and man's savagery which is his spontaneous condition.

You, on the other hand, are inconsistent. If all turns out well and man is basically good, there is no need for those institutions you cherish. Except perhaps beyond a silly sentimentality.

Bottom line, it is you who are being inconsistent, not me.

[ayque]

Regardless of if it is inconsistent, it works for me as a frame of mind so I am happy with it.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Yes, and that is why, while I enjoy talking with you this is a subject I would rather not pursue with you. It is axiomatic that you cannot reason a person out of a viewpoint into which he was not reasoned to begin with.

Suffice to add that the triumph of emotion over reason is what has got us things like Seattle - and much worse.

[ayque]

And as I said, not if you have established foundations and you act within the established framework.

[ayque]

I am however flattered to know that you enjoy talking with me. I also enjoy talking to you. You are a good debating partner.

[nightdrot]

@ayque On your last posting, thanks - and I meant it. As to your first, Sorry? Your antecedents in your sentence are unclear. I am just guessing what you were referring to but to speak of foundations is problematic. If people are basically good and all turns out well, you have no need for foundations. man will be good because he is made to. The rest is extraneous.

[ayque]

It is optimism within an established framework.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That is both illogical and inconsistent. The optimist believes that men are basically good and that all will turn out well. If you require an institutional framework to make that work, then you cannot claim to be an optimist.

Optimism is a presumption of the best possible outcome. If you require certain preconditions to get that outcome, they you are no longer presuming those outcomes as they depend on the efficacy of the institutions that make them possible.

[ayque]

It is a moderate and conditional optimism, rather than an extremist optimism. In Britain, we are proud of our institutions and our framework and hence we can look at them through the eyes of optimism.

I am slightly concerned about reports in the media of potential clashes between BLM protestors and far right groups. Although police say they are ready to act at the first sign of trouble.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Your institutions works because they are rooted in historical experience. They work, to the extent that they do, because they are adapted to human nature in all its' imperfections and frailties.

Put another way, they are not premised on an optimistic view of human nature but rather in the lived of its experience of its' weakness. Put another way, they assume a pessimistic, not an optimistic, view of the human condition.

[nightdrot]

By the way - and no need to respond to this one - appropos of nothing other than that we had earlier been discussing violent protests, I discovered the following video by accident. Bristol is not Seattle, but the thinking of the authorities in both cities is strikingly similar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDa7bh27cBQ

[ayque]

Interesting though that our PM has now spoken out about the extremism taking over some parts of the protests.

news.sky.com/.../pm-anti-racism-protests-hijacked-by-extremists-12005317

[nightdrot]

@ayque This is what happens when sanctimony and self-righteousness is given reign. In due course it conduces to extremism and violence.

Applauding the noble intent of the peaceful protests quickly slips into indulgence and in the fullness of time the peaceful protests become riots.

[ayque]

Well that is one valid thought but I think people should still have a voice and the right to protest within reason. I applaud our authorities for challenging extremism especially after seeing the situation in the US.

[nightdrot]

@ayque They do have that right, but it is not a question of the right but if the prudence in exercising it. As one of your countrymen, Edmund Burke - my hero - said, "The foundation of government is. . . laid, not in imaginary rights of men, (which at best is a confusion of judicial with civil principles,) but in political convenience, and in human nature; either as that nature is universal, or as it is modified by local habits and social aptitudes. The foundation of government. . . is laid in a provision for our wants, and in a conformity to our duties; it is to purvey for the one; it is to enforce the other."

To which he added, “It is not, what a lawyer tells me I may do; but what humanity, reason, and justice, tell me I ought to do.”

[ayque]

Well again a valid thought but I prefer the thought of freedom within reason. I do however sometimes think that the aforementioned reason is stretched too far but that is a personal opinion.

[nightdrot]

@ayque That is Burke's point. What you see in Seattle (and Bristol, apparently) is freedom absolute and unconditional. To quote him again, "Government is not made in virtue of natural rights, which may and do exist in total independence of it; and exist in much greater clearness, and in a much greater degree of abstract perfection: but their abstract perfection is their practical defect. By having a right to every thing they want every thing."

That last line being especially pertinent at the moment.

[ayque]

I think less extreme in Bristol compared to Seattle but still illegal. The Government here have made clear now that such behaviour will not be tolerated and have planned to fast track the justice system to put as many of those who break the law behind bars as possible. This was a tactic used here against rioters back in 2011 and it worked well. I remember back then detectives worked 24/7 To gather evidence and courts also sat over night and over the weekends, quickly detecting, arresting those responsible and moving those arrested from police custody cells to the courts and then to carry out their sentence.

[nightdrot]

@ayque All to the good. Of course, your system is more centralized than the American Federal system and so the British government is able to give more immediate effect to its intentions.

In the American system, law enforcement is predominantly a state and local government matter. That is part of the problem here, but the Federal government is not without authority to step in. Yet President Trump huffs and puffs and says, "Someone else should take this matter in hand."

Such are the fruits of populism. Institutions are delegitimized and it makes it problematic to enforce the law. The legal authority to do so may exist, but there is no underlying ethos to support it.

Fortunately, while Prime Minister Johnson tends to a more populist brand of politics, he does so in the context of a society and a culture where tradition, order and established institutions habitually get more deference. (Hence why you have a monarchy, a peerage and an established church this deep into the 21st century.)

So by any measure, Britain is better off by default and is being better governed at the moment. The simple social tolerance for disorder is far less than in the United States.

That said, as was sort of my point, a philosophic optimism about human nature will do you no favors. The UK's institutions and habitual respect for the rule of law were born with an appreciation for the limits of human nature and human goodness. You weaken that underlying social/cultural pessimism at your peril.

[ayque]

I see your point but it’s a compromise I’m willing to accept within reason for the benefit of more freedom and some level of carefully measured progression achieved through consensus. Believe it or not, despite some of my more liberal views on some issues, I understand and agree also with many conservative views and on some issues, fully support it. That is what I call moderate optimism.

The US federal system is fascinating and I can see it has some advantages, as well as disadvantages, over the unitary system we have here in Britain.

[nightdrot]

@ayque The point being, in response to your first point, to quote Burke yet one more time, "The effect of liberty to individuals is that they may do as they please. We ought see what it will please them to do before we risk congratulations."

Of course we want the balance between liberty and order - virtue is a mean, as Aristotle said - but we must judge the utility of freedom by its outcomes and place prudent limits where experience and human nature. Liberty is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

As to the British and American systems. I confess that I am an American who greatly admires the UK and the British system. The British system could not work in the United States for a variety of historical, cultural and sociological reasons, but it has certainly proved its merits over the course of history.

[ayque]

Yes I agree with a balance. In terms of progression, I support positive and carefully measured change established through consensus.

Well yes culture and history plays a large part in the formation of society. That’s why all countries have a different system, each with their own pros and cons and in many cases not fair to compare due to the differences in history and culture. Although of course there will be learning points which can be shared.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, not much to dispute with you here. You have more or less come to a classical conservative viewpoint - even if it is not entirely clear to me the consistency of the pedigree of the premises that got you there.

However, in politics as in life, if you can get the right thing for the wrong reasons - or in this case from a not entirely intellectually consistent starting point - take it.

[ayque]

We are all flawed. Well ok here’s the truth of the matter - I’ve always been attracted to the face of moderate liberalism and there are some views within it which I agree and others which I wish I could agree with but I just can’t get myself to agree with.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, you don't really seem to adhere to "moderate" liberal ideas. You seem to be making up classifications as you go.

Not sure what "moderate" liberalism is. There is classical liberalism and its "radical" variant. ("Radical" here not meaning its incorrect contemporary usage, i. e. "extremist," but rather as the ancient Greeks used the term, "to the root of.")

Not sure where you place yourself in that spectrum - however, you seem to have stumbled on a sort of classical conservatism, more by accident than design, and without necessarily having though through the predicate.

That said, as Michael Oakeshott said, "The pedigree of every political ideology shows it to be the creature, not of premeditation in advance of political activity, but of meditation upon a manner of politics. Political activity always precedes ideological reflection and comprehends it..."

[ayque]

I agree more with classic liberalism than radical liberalism. I can tolerate radical liberalism as I grew up with it but I don’t agree with it necessarily.

[nightdrot]

@ayque Well, good to hear, but as I am not sure of your use of terminology and how it tracks with historic definitions, I am not sure I am absolutely confident I understand what you are saying.

No matter. Classical liberal I ain't - but eh, you're still a nice guy. Cheers!

[ayque]

And you. I hope we will have another debate soon. I will be sure to expand my knowledge through literature before then.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Absolutely not. First and foremost they have called for killing cops and that alone makes them disgusting. Then you factor in the rioting and looting which is also a mark against them.

Then you have the major issue that their founding principle for their cause, police actively targeting blacks and being just generally racist (the irony is many will argue that not all black lives matter members want cops killed or are racist towards whites, yet the very premise that black lives posits is that all cops are racist and by extension so is the entire government and country (but we are suppose to look at them as individuals but not the other way around), is factually incorrect.

If blacks were targeted, we would have more blacks killed by cops then whites, this however is not the case. Also if we look at the statistics the EXACT OPPOSITE is true, cops are 18.5% MORE LIKELY TO BE KILLED BY BLACKS THEN BLACKS ARE TO BE KILLED BY COPS. So in fact blue lives matter actually has far more legitimacy then black lives matter.

Another issue is that black lives matter doesn't actually care about black lives. Even pretending that all incidents with police are racially fueled (they are not, black cops and Hispanic cops have the same arrest records and incident occurences are identical to their white counter parts), even ignoring that most people killed are white, ignoring that only 4% of fatal incounters with the police are questionable, that's 32 out of the 800 that occur in a nation of 327 million, even throwing in an additional 200 to round that out to a solid thousand, is this the primary issue within the black community? Well lets look, how many blacks are killed by blacks? Over 9200 a year on average. So even lying through my teeth, rounding up the numbers, counting all occurences as if they were all unjustified when in fact only about 4% are questionable, ignoring that the majority of those are white, ignoring all of that and giving that much leeway you still have more then a 900% greater threat to blacks coming from blacks then cops. Is violence from police an issue? Absolutely not.

On top of that they claim racism but statistically blacks are 150% more likely to commit hate crimes then whites. Is racism from whites an issue? No. According to the statistical data from the DOJ and FBI (backed by NCVS data) shows that 80% of all interracial violence is perpetrated BY BLACKS AGAINST WHITES! Is racism from whites towards blacks a problem, is violence from whites towards blacks a problem? Absolutely not! The EXACT OPPOSITE IS TRUE. So no, I do not support a movement of people who are rabidly racist, completely ignorant, and horribly violent.

[KeziL]

I support some parts of it.

I support equal treatment for black people. I think they deserve so much better than what the world is for them right now. I think everyone oughta be treated with respect and dignity and the value of their lives should be recognized.

However, I don't agree with the "All Cops Are Bad" idea. I really, really don't. I've seen people out on social media who are trying to get their local governments to DEFUND THE POLICE STATIONS. DEFUND THEM! Do y'all realize the implications if they somehow managed to succeed? These are also the same kind of people who are pushing for gun control. When someone breaks into your home, threatens your family, well, I hope you have a great time wishing you still had some cops around to risk their lives to save your sorry ass. They have families too, lives.

I don't agree with the rioting. People are being killed, beaten, maimed. Businesses are being destroyed. People are afraid and others are mourning the loss of their loved ones who were UNNECESSARILY KILLED by people supposedly fighting AGAINST UNNECESSARY KILLINGS.

I don't agree with the support targeting that's going on. I see comments under so many people's posts on social media saying "excUSE me, I noticed you haven't posted about BLM (or maybe their four posts of the day just weren't enough) and I think you're so so selfish for actually daring to have followers and not put your name down to support everything that's happening without question." Half these people aren't even from the US! They're getting absolutely chewed out for not getting out on the streets and protesting, WHEN THEY ARE NOT EVEN FUCKING HERE. Some of their countries don't even have these problems so big. Like I just feel like this is an America problem first and foremost and while support and activism elsewhere is great, it isn't our place to DEMAND that people across the world fight our fight.

[eagle1951]

nicely said

[ChatterboxShiv]

It's a pretty big reason to feel shaken and if you just surround yourself with information you begin to realise how many lives have been shattered because of this. Young black children having to learn how to put their hands up, not reach into their pocket and say their name. "I am not armed". It's stuff like that that really kinda freaks me out. I didn't know about any of this until year 8 maybe but kids are having to live through this in America from such a young age. I haven't been too racially segregated and tbh there is no way to compare. America is such an oppressed nation. My mums bff from America was like "oh yeah this is a daily thing". Yes, it is but you are desensitised. This should not be normal. This is not good. The only way it will be solved is for worldwide havoc. Same happened with the riots during the women's movement in the 1900s. Racism can't be burned like we want the house to be in animal farm, so by making this a personal extravaganza to people, only then will they wake up and realise we have to do something. Having to live in a place where walking into a shop can end up with you dead is something that no one should live with. It's disgusting. Put yourself in Floyd's shoes. And the shoes of the thousands of people. People of colour who have died due to racial discrimination. Killing is unacceptable when it happens to someone important but does that make black people unimportant. Why do they go under the radar? Is that acceptable? I guess it also might be because I like to know about the world and I like to get my voice heard but it's just so disgusting that people who are "trained" can treat someone so lowly because of what? Their skin.
I 110% support the movement and even though there iss carnage worldwide at the moment during an infectious pandemic like this, I feel as if this will be a real wakeup call to our corrupt legal and political systems world wide.

[websterII]

absolutely they do matter.. if i could change one thing about it tho it would be that all lives matter. fact is i think we donot have representation in this country i think the vote is a scam a hoax.. yet we still habe to pay taxes.. even if we make less than a living wage! .. making most of us just plain slaves. surviving and being enslaved by debt. meanwhile jeff bezos has the wealth of 150,000 mllionaires.. or more.. that'is more wealth than many many countries.. in fact in the usa today while the vote is meaningles the real vote is the dollar.. and so naturally jeff bezos has a few milliion more votes than i do.. so naturally the usg works for bezos and his friends.. dont think politicians work for the rich? well hillary got 1.5 years of presidental salary equivelent for 2x 20 min speeches to goldman sachs.. clinton got paid around 300k a year for her sec of state job.. if she sved very pennyshe might have 1.2 mllion after her govt post. but no.. they aquired over 2 billion in wealth while she was in office.. now.. honestly.. who do you think clinton worked for? goldmans achs? whoever gave her the 2 billion? sure as hell didn't work for the American people...

[Bananaman177]

NO. I support black people killing each other and burning Liberal cities to the ground, but I don't support any bullshit about apologizing for slavery or kissing their black asses and begging them not to riot. Slavery was the best thing that ever happened to black people and they should be grateful for getting to live in a modern, prosperous country instead of being left in Africa to live in a mud hut and eat bugs, like their ancestors who sold them into slavery in the first place. We didn't go into the jungles with nets and kidnap them, they were already chained up and waiting for us when we got into port. They aren't descended from "kings and queens," they were SOLD to us by their old kings and queens. And now they get to enjoy things like soap, medicine, education, the internet, air conditioning, cheap, delicious, nutritious food, and a million other things they never could have EVER invented for themselves. Black people are ungrateful. The average IQ of black people in Africa is 75. The average IQ of black people in America is 85. The cutoff for mental retardation is 75. We literally lifted them out of retardation, and all they can do with their ten point boost from living in a white country is complain and whine and loot and rob and kill. Fuck them. They should go back to Africa if they think they'd like it more.

[ChatterboxShiv]

You're the living, breathing definition of racism. Singling out a group of people and using their appearance as a weapon against them. The coke that you drink on a daily basis (to keep you from sleeping while writing your boring ass racist rants that no one actually reads) , it's main ingredient came from Africa. A low life like you, should know better for your age. You say that their IQ is "low" but oh Honey, please get your own checked out. I don't think it'd pass a dozen.

[Mossberg500]

@ChatterboxShiv Lol you're gonna have a brain aneurysm when white revolution takes place. You can thank the Juden and the bought American Government. Don't blame the host race for defending themselves.

If millions of whites decided they wanted to move into Mexico illegally in massive numbers would you say that is ok? If whites bred like rabbits and pushed out the host Mexicans, would that be right or wrong.

Was conquering (what became America) from the American Indians wrong? I imagine you'd say yes, well maybe that is true, but that was a much different time when humans had a much different train of thought. Nation conquering wasn't illegal back that. It is illegal now. White Europeans built the United States.

The American indians were savage warring tribes with no kind of higher civilization, no real legal system, no kind of human rights or liberties. Not that that makes it ok, but I'm tired of leftists acting like the Natives were some sort of peace loving hippies or some shit. No, they were extremely violent tribes butchering each other before Europeans ever came to this rock.

But I'm not worried, the pendulum is swinging all the way back. Once Zognald is gone I think things will heat up fast.

Hard times create strong men.
Strong men create good times.
Good times create weak men.
And, weak men create hard times.

[Prof_Don]

So much obsession with black people!

by the way nobody is wiping out white Americans. This whole “race war” idea is overblown.

White women aren’t having enough babies; that’s why the demographics are changing in America so rapidly

[ChatterboxShiv]

@Mossberg500 White Europeans colonised your country from the vague understanding I have of that. They did exactly what you stated in your first paragraph. If white people illegally colonised another country (as they previously have) then they wouldn't be looked down upon. White privilege.
Every culture has its own way of living and I'm sure if you looked back to when we were all neanderthals, we lived exactly the same as each other.
If Trump was Stalin then you'd be one of his first KGB recruits.
Bro just open your eyes

[Mossberg500]

@ChatterboxShiv They didn't "illegally" colonize. Nation building wasn't illegal in the 16th and 17th centuries stupid. Get a history lesson. It was not stolen land it was conquered land.

What is happening now is not "traditional" conquering. It is an agenda spurred on by multiculti-globohomo. I pity the FOOLS on the wrong side of the revolution.

But since you are so against illegally occupied land under the current geneva convention certainly you endorse wiping Israel off the map correct?

[Anonymous]

No and I’m sick to death of racism! Why does this even still exist? I don’t see colour I see cultural differences that is all. I have friends of all races and colours and ye they are different to me they all do things differently to the way I did growing up. I can’t invite my Muslim girl mates to the pub for food because their families wouldn’t like it. My Thai friends don’t heavily drink but like to walk and pick fruits etc. My black friends are different based on which country they come from. I know they are different to me but I adapt to each friend.
I am sick to death though of the lopsided racism. This last week white people have been told they can’t braid their hair cos it’s a black thing! Erm no ever heard of french or Dutch plaits if they’re gonna play those cards they will be told to fuck right off!
the news is documenting 8% of deaths in prison account for black people but they only make up 3% of the UK population but what they fail to mention is they make up 15% of the prison population so 8% is low! Watching the poor police horses have weapons thrown at them is a fucking disgrace and the rioting! Acting like animals. There is zero excuse for that behaviour. LIFE MATTERS

[SwordShield]

No. BLM has proven to be a racist, hateful, vain, ignorant, gatekeeping group only concerned with stomping out the ludicrous notion of a nationwide, deep systemic racism in the US. I especially talk about the Toronto chapter of BLM when I say this as their leadership are blatantly racist, mostly Yusra Khogali.

Also, let's be honest, George Floyd's death was simply a result of the incompetence of the system of recruiting these officers, and of the officers themselves, not anything about race.

I also support something I have come up with, neo-ALMism. Less patriotism/nationalism and more unification of the races against the problem of racism.

The reason I have come up with an idea like this is because I'm a receiver of racism myself and will not belittle myself to a position as an "ally" when I want to stand up with others of different races against racism.

Would it not be ideal for a united version of BLM so it wouldn't be biased towards the black community?

[American_Centurion]

No. I support the other lives matter group that can't be mentioned on this site.

[mrkdvsn]

You mean the ALL Lives Matter group?

[American_Centurion]

@mrkdvsn ssssshhhh!!!

[mrkdvsn]

Yeah... There was recently a female asking a question here on GaG who said that anyone using the phrase "all lives matter", she would REPORT. She was obviously a very angry person.

[American_Centurion]

@mrkdvsn I remember lol

[Jjpayne]

I believe all lives matter because they do, black lives included.

My goal is to get black people the fairness they deserve then put it back on all people because black lives are not the only ones that have trouble. Given, it's some significant at this point. But there are many of different types of different people in danger throughout the world. It's not a world of just white and dark skin, there are more people out there that need help too. And again, #blacklivesmatter I believe they do and we need to stop this racism but the overall focus should be all lives matter because that's true as well. And I'm not talking about the comfort of people either. Personally, those with religious beliefs in other countries are in danger, and that's just one example. Muslims can be another.

[ScottStevens]

I support all lives matter and I truly appreciate why Black Lives Matter is so important in today's world. The young generation is doing a much better job of inclusion for all than my generation so I know we still have plenty of work to do on the subject of racism. BUT I do not support the violence that is being instigated by those who want to take advantage of the situation for there own political gain.

Our political leaders, the Celebrities, and all people should not be out condoning violence as the answer to our problems. When the recent Murder of an innocent Black Man was televised over and over again, our country was united in it's response to that horrible event. Then suddenly the people who should be preaching clam and understanding went to the forefront and encouraged violence that will NOT solve any problems, only divide us further once again.

[honestGUY45]

How about we stop using the word innocent when describing a man that was trying to pass a counterfeit $20 bill and was high on meth and fentanyl and was being arrested for those charges. Did he deserve to die? No he didn't. But that doesn't make him innocent. Supporting a movement to correct a problem is fine, but let's do it honestly and cut the innocent crap.

[ScottStevens]

@honestGUY45 At the time of the crime by the Police Officer, no one had toxicity tests. The film shows the victim cooperating with the arrest. The Officer had every opportunity to place the victim in his vehicle for transportation. Every citizen deserves better treatment than what this Officer was doing. The other Officers around did nothing to step in after even two minutes to save the man's life. They all choose to do nothing. That is the part that stands out the most. It was not necessary.

[honestGUY45]

I'm not saying the police officers did nothing wrong, they all did. My point was the use of the word innocent in describing his death. It doesn't matter whether someone is guilty or innocent, a police officer has no right to kill the person they are arresting. The word guilty or innocent should not be used to describe the victim. It's not going to void or justify the reason for their killing. It's only being used to inflate the narrative.

[queeneemy]

I do!

Actually, it's not even about being black, it's about being a human being. Police officers and law enforcement are supposed to protect us, we should be able to trust them. But they've been abusing their power forever. An innocent human being being killed by a cop for absolutely no reason is simply disgusting, let alone if it happens only because you're black. White people commit crimes as well, do drugs as well, etc. It's not a black thing.
There's no point denying it. Racism is real, it is happening. We can't close our eyes anymore. It's 2020 people!

We're all human beings. We should be treated equally.

[wisefool]

Police corruption is real. Systemic racism is not.

[FatherJack]

No , because it is NOT founded for the benefit of black people... this is a deliberately engineered tool of division and control , and will be used as a pretext for more draconian restrictions... such as martial law and constant surveillance & tracking , and this " happened " very quickly after pushback protests over the C19 lockdowns... those living in devastated communties already suffering from this lockdown , can thank George Soros and his gang for funding agent provocateurs to start these riots... wake up people... don't be sheeple !!

[Gedaria]

All lives matter. But this movement no.
For the last couple of years in the UK, blacks have been killing blacks. Either stabbing or shooting, gang related, or drugs
No one battered an eye lid. It's probably the same in the US.
No one went to this guy's defence when he was saying I can't breathe. But some one got that close he was nearly under the car with him.
What would the propaganda have been if the PO had been Black , which it could quite well of been.
I wonder how many black guys guys behave died since in Minnesota?

[Anonymous]

I am to treat all people equally by loving my neighbor as myself. I refuse to believe in races and black lives matter requires one to believe in races. I realize there are racist out there, but to say black people are only killed because of their skin color or that racist are only a certain skin color, that to me is racist. The moment you make racism a skin color you are the racist. What happened to Floyd was wrong and clearly excessive force, but you either see a man killed or a black man killed. If his skin color makes a difference to you as far as outrage or disgust, then you are a racist. If you riot because of your or someone else skin color you are racist. I believe the police should have better training, but I support their work. These riots are proof positive why we need police, to stop these heinous crimes. What happened to David Dorn should never have happened.

[Mossberg500]

God no. I'm a white nationalist. I say it loud and proud. Black hood rats keep on proving the scum they are over and over and over again.

Here in the South they are not so bad. Probably because they are outnumbered heavily by white people in my area. But if you look at most Urban cities you can see blacks acting like they still live in the jungle. Not only do they loot and destroy private property, they actively seek out white people to attack. This is a racist group.. More racist than this White Nat. could ever be... no seriously.

[Black Guns Matter]

[DiegoO]

At least you admit it. Racist fucks that don't do it always try their best to hide their thoughts behind questionable logics.

[Mossberg500]

@DiegoO I never said I was "racist." Lol. I'm a race realist. White societies are much better off and function better when they are a significant majority in their own countries. Europeans built the modern world. Deal with it.

[DiegoO]

That's basically saying you are a racist! Lol, unbelievable.

[Mossberg500]

@DiegoO History is racist! Before you go and make such presumptions, prove me wrong. You couldn't prove me wrong in a thousand years. MSNBC probably substitutes as your brain.

You'll be happy to know I work with blacks, and I don't think less of these people because of genetics. I actually like a lot of them. But country blacks are a lot more "Uncle Tom" as their brothers and sisters would call them. That certainly doesn't mean I endorse race-mixing or even want them in my neighborhood. There is a reason racial profiling exists. 13 = 52. I did not ask for Multi-Culti. This was forced on our white nations.

[DiegoO]

"God no. I'm a white nationalist. I say it loud and proud. Black hood rats keep on proving the scum they are over and over and over again".

Racist by definition.

[Mossberg500]

@DiegoO So now facts are racist? I wonder what will be racist tomorrow. Listen Miguel, I work with lots of good black folks. I'm a blue-collar factory worker. The urban-city hood rats are trash, and now their own cities look like it (even more than they did a few weeks ago.) Facts dont care about your feels.

[ChatterboxShiv]

Bro if you say that about blacks, then it stands for us brown people too and for all other races ever. All races have their "problems" but singling them out and judging a selective group of people (in your case "black hood rats") is the definition of racism.

[Mossberg500]

@ChatterboxShiv Wrong, I despise Antifa communists too. Most of them are white fuck boys lol.

That said, yeah, "browns" are a problem because they are are overwhelming my WASP country. I don't dislike them personally as an ethnicity, I dislike the fact that they are displacing my race in it's own nation. And it's all part of the Juden plan to genocide Whites. In Europe, they get Arabs and North Africans mostly. Multiculturalism is a joke. Which is why the Government is a joke. Which is why ZOGNALD TRUMP and the entire government is a joke. I'm onto this artificial shit.

Do you really think the United States #1 world power couldn't stop illegal immigration if they really wanted to? Of course they could, but thanks to shady pocket Goyim (Zionist puppets) they let it happen. The US is not run from Washington DC it's run from Tel Aviv, the various Jude PACs (which is most of them) are the inside the US "plants" to fund the politicians that will perpetuate this cycle of unsustainable immigration into white nations.

And for the record, if you want to call me (or view me) as a racist I don't care. Been called racist, Nazi, Anti-semite and everything under the sun thousands of times.

What is to like about black hood rats? There are also blacks that are decent people. Most decent black people don't like hood rats either, because they call them "Uncle Toms" and "Coons" if they dare to escape the ghetto thug hood life.

My main issue is miscegenation and unsustainable immigration for the white (Europeans) and the people behind it all. But like I said I don't care if people want to put labels on me. I guess I'm racist against whites too cause I don't like The Left Commies or the Right (Civic Nationalist Trump sheep) We call them the other liberals.

95% of America is snowed by the Jews. I will oppose it because it is Just. It is righteous. I'm not gonna go out like a bitch like most White people are currently doing. I'm gonna tell the hard truth that no one wants to hear.

[lsjr16]

I support Black lives movement for what they stand for. I don’t stand for the defund the police. There is a lot of police officers that do a good job and are nice. However there is a good amount of them that are bad and racist. Instead of defunding police it should be having polic officers having diversity training racial bias training and officers that had many complaints should be investigated by outside dA or department and the officers should be suspended. Officers should also lose their job if they have a certain amount of complaints

[Anonymous]

I did at first, but as the week has gone by and I have learned more about Floyd and have seen the destruction of private and public property, the looting and the hateful talk against whites, I don't support it any more. I was never a Trump supporter, but now I am. This bullshit is only causing more polarization. I am really tired of the "does this make me a racist" type questions. A man high on meth and fentanol, positive for COVID, trying to pass a conterfit bill, with a violent past, arrested for beating a pregnant woman is now a hero. Protesters/ rioters are looting and burning inocent people's businesses and seem to be heros also. The police I guess are scared to do anything now, they might go to jail. Let the military stop it and declare Marshal Law. The thugs will understand that.

[JackSmy]

Sad that you felt you had to post Anonymous, because most of what you said is true! They made him a Martyr and a CAUSE, and there definitely are issues, unresolved! But burning and looting businesses of people that had NOTHING TO DO with his murder is just SENSELESS VIOLENCE and ABUSE of the people running those businesses!!
Some were Latino, and Asian, and aren't they being persecuted, and aren't these protesters, burning their business committing RACIST CRIMES against those people? So if a black person burns, and loots a Asian's business, how is that NOT ALSO RACISM?
I wonder about these protests, and like you said, the hate against whites, that also had nothing to do with this! But I guess you can't be 'racist' against whites, right? Like I said, HYPOCRITES!!

[queeneemy]

That's actually a good point. Certainly destroying innocent people's property is not the way to win this cause. However, those are the actions of ignorant people who definitely should be taught a lesson.
Peaceful protesters have been attacked for no reason. I saw a video of a 10 year old being maced by the police. How big of a threat could she really be?

Racism is real, it is happening and it shouldn't. The whole question about Floyd is: would it have happened if he was white? If it was a white man with the same background, who had committed the same crimes (because there are white men who have done way worse than that) would that police officer put his knee to that man's neck? If he committed those crimes, he should pay for them, but putting a knee on his neck and preventing him from breathing doesn't sound very human to me.
He probably isn't the best example but black people who were completely innocent have been murdered by police officers. Floyd's story is just the tip of the iceberg.

I also feel bad for his daughter. That little girl is going to grow up without her father and she doesn't deserve that.

I do agree with pretty much everything you said, but we need to look at the bigger picture, instead of only Floyd's case.

[Celtero]

Nope. They operate under false pretenses that are harmful to themselves and the country as a whole.

You know who kills the most blacks? Other blacks. We could do the world a lot more good if we focussed on rehabilitating troubled communities instead of parading in this facade that America is racist and police are hunting down blacks in the streets when the reality is only a handful of people are unjustly killed by police a year, most being white.

[Spencer422]

Everyone thinks the opposite side operates under false pretenses. The way the bipartisan system as it is today operates is (as I've seen) they try to get you on their side by convincing you that you aren't on the other side, to the point where not many people can know the truth but that doesn't matter because at that point pride kicks in, you think "I'm better than that" and fight. That's the real problem with the world: pride.

[carlodane]

Yes! People on this site need to understand that the BLM movement isn't saying that no other race matters. The BLM movement is protests against police brutality towards black people in the US. To fight against racism and to start putting an end to it, we need to support each other and fight racial injustice, which is why there's Black Lives Matters. It's not to degrade or put down any other race.

[wisefool]

If they just stood against police brutality instead of against police brutality against blacks, they would get a lot more support, but they don't so they don't.

[Shezadi]

[es20490446e]

George Floyd:
- 5 years in prison for armed robbery.
- Stopped by the police while robbing.
- And being under the influence of meths.
- And resisting the arrest for several minutes.
- While bystanders fucking around.

[Hypnos0929]

So your claim is being an asshole means you deserve to be murdered while handcuffed?

[DiegoO]

Where did you get that? Fox News? Or from some far right media? Are you justifying his murder? Do you understand under what context he died? Beside from allegedly resisting arrest (does that makes any sense)? I firmly believe you have no clue about what his murder imply.

[keno_ke]

@Hypnos0929 He's just saying that George Floyd's death had nothing to do with racism. Derek Chauvin wasn't racially motivated. He didn't say any racial slurs at Floyd.

[MementoMori_]

Floyd was a subhuman predatory thug. Not only did he commit armed robbery, he posed as a utility worker to fool a pregnant black woman into opening her door to let him in, then busted the door open when she realized he was an impostor. He put a gun to her pregnant stomach threatening to kill her and held her at gunpoint screaming and pleading for her life while his band of fellow mutant marauders who were waiting in a car outside busted in to ransack her house looking for money and drugs (they didn't find any).

This guy was a career violent criminal. The world is better off with him dead. The cop did black people and everyone else a favor.

[MementoMori_]

How about this. If you don't want to take a chance of being killed by a cop, DON'T COMMIT A CRIME.

How hard is that?

[MementoMori_]

I'd call what happened to Floyd, justice for that pregnant woman. How sad do you figure she was about his death?

[sang2020]

@DiegoO BBC, NPR reported this. He was trying to buy cigarettes with fake 20 bill on the day he died. His friend who was in the car had an arrest warrant on him.

If you don't want cops profiling you, don't commit crimes and don't be friends with people who commit crimes.

[Hypnos0929]

@sang2020
That's not what profiling is.
Additionally police aren't some magical creatures that can see your history. Also if they knew his friend had warrants then why is Mr. Floyd the dead man instead of just arrested?
Being guilty of one crime doesn't mean you're guilty of another crime.

[sang2020]

@Hypnos0929 i highly doubt that derek chauvin actually intended to kill him. He had a gun and other weapons. He would have used them if he wanted to kill him. I think Derek wanted to arrest him and used more force, because Floyd resisted arrest for several minutes before the incident.

[Hypnos0929]

@sang2020
So you do believe Mr. Chauvin deserves to be in jail for 3rd degree murder at least?
Because it doesn't matter what he intended to do. He heard the man begging for his life, Floyd did not assault him, and Floyd had already been subdued and was no longer allegedly resisting.

[es20490446e]

@Hypnos0929 @DiegoO

I have news for you, the universe doesn't have a concept of "fairness". If an hurricane comes and destroys a village, it isn't because it's fair.

The universe only understands cause and effect. If you buy tickets for death, eventually you hit jackpot. Fair or not.

If a fucking murderer is going to kill your family it doesn't fucking matter what are your rights, the only fucking thing that matters is how not to get killed.

But you still believe that some magical entity shall come and save you, cause it's the fair thing.

[DiegoO]

Wtf that have to do with what happened? George Floyd served 5y in prison, then tried to straighten up his life. Because he had criminal record he supposed to die? The guy didn't even put resistance, he was chill.

Like I said, you have no clue about the reality in the US, you have no clue about sistematic racial discrimination in that nation.

[sang2020]

@DiegoO he tried to straighten life by using a counterfeit bill and hanging out with a criminal? Ok
... Anyway I think Derek Chauvin should be given a trial
He should be convicted of a crime if the evidence supports it.

[DiegoO]

@sang2020 Your opinion is ridiculous and cruel. This is not about the sanctity of George Floyd, is not about how good of a person he was, it's about the exaggerated and insensitive reaction of the cops that hold him up, and is about how HISTORICALLY Afro-Americans and other racial minorities haven been abused and killed by law enforcement in the US.

[MementoMori_]

The way I look at it Floyd was lucky to get a longer life than he was morally entitled to. He should have been executed after he tortured the pregnant woman... who was black, by the way. Why doesn't HER life matter to you fakes, phonies and frauds who say you care about black people.

You make a mistake, you get a second chance. You make "mistakes" 5 more times you get executed. Too damn bad. This guy was a menace to society and should have been put down by the law like the rabid dog he was years before.

[es20490446e]

@DiegoO I'm simply saying that he being black had nothing to do with it, nothing else.

[sang2020]

@DiegoO I am a racial minority (East Asian). We also had issues with police in the beginning, but we worked hard, stayed out of trouble and became successful and marketed our culture. The police stopped targeting us.

[DiegoO]

@sang2020 Lol, you are a joke.

[sang2020]

@DiegoO no. Its true. Even people outside of us have a poor view of blacks because of your culture. Asians think of hip hop, drugs, sex, jayz, Beyonce etc. They need to change that image.

[keno_ke]

@sang2020 Beyonce isn't a stereotypical ghetto black woman. She speaks properly, doesn't curses when she speaks. I think you're talking about Nicki Minaj.

[ChatterboxShiv]

@MementoMori_ If this all turned out properly Floyd would have gotten the help that he needed and the pregnant woman would too. Pregnancy lasts 9 months, colour lasts a lifetime. Sure the baby would live a life too and he's entitled to that but the real problem here isn't just one pregnant woman. It's the problem that is held in the hearts of a whole race.

[ChatterboxShiv]

@sang2020 Working hard doesn't cut it in the US. Blacks have been oppressed for centuries.

[MementoMori_]

@ChatterboxShiv

Working hard doesn't cut it if you are black? Then how come my 25 yo black girlfriend, who grew up in a family of 13 children in one of the poorest inner city neighborhoods in the USA is now working on Wall Street earning 6 figures? I'll tell you how come. It's because SHE IGNORED the apologists for black laziness and victimism like you who told her America is a racist country, don't work hard and even try to succeed because you can't do it. She JUST DID IT.

There are more opportunities for black people in the United States than there are for white people. Colleges, corporations and governments are just BEGGING for black people to walk into their doors so they can admit and hire them and give them a fast track to advance. The only thing that's holding them back is the evil people on the left who are feeding them a constant barrage of BS about American racism and the hopelessness of their situation.

[ChatterboxShiv]

@MementoMori_ Giving people opportunities doesn't cut it when the whole society has a fked up way of thinking. Your girlfriend may have not been a victim but i ASSURE YOU that she is among the few. Yes, opportunities are given but by who? Your government. Not your people. Legal systems are fucked. Society is fucked. Australia gives ATSI people so many opportunities but still, they are marginalised. Your girlfriend isn't the only person in the world. Open your eyes.

[godfatherfan]

No. I know plenty of things are fucked up in regards to police vs the black community. But ALL LIVES MATTER, not just black lives. As far as I am concerned, they are more racist then anyone they are trying to protest against. When they include everyone and not just black lives, I will support them.

[DiegoO]

BLM focus on police brutality that follows a racist agenda against the black comunity. The black community has historically been marginized and treated like the worst, not only in the US. It's real, and it shouldn't be ignored or hush with "All Life Matters" since the latter don't have any sustancial meaning for the porpoise of fighting racism. Of course all life matters, but Black Life Matters serve a porpoise with a name that address all the struggles of the Afro comunity to be accepted as a human being with equal rights and respect, and not something inferior. Is something any other racial minority should feel identified with, in the US or any other place where they are a minority.

[ChatterboxShiv]

@DiegoO I agree 100%. All lives won't matter until Black lives do too. Simple maths dude.
All lives - Black lives DOESN'T EQUAL All lives
Black lives + The rest of the lives bringing light to this = All lives
Practice what you preach
I feel like, a person your age should be able to understand this the most. Black people have been oppressed for so so long. White people have been getting advantages for so long. It's a privilege that exists. White people don't want this privilege because frankly said, it is bias and wrongly so. If we all unite as coloured people (and white people) we can make a change for the better.

[Asianguy123]

I support robing rich people. I liked the video that they steal from Louis Vuitton. That's about it. I think that racism or police is not the problem. segregation exist in American but they are happy living with the same race. When I was in the US, white people or black people don't talk to me so I hang out with Korean. I had a lot of fun spending time with her. I think that rich people who owns everything destroy environment and they want more and more and exploiting everyone. Just see the people who barely make a living paying rent and food. Something is wrong here.

[Doglover000]

This is just getting people to bow down again like two years ago on the LGBTQ rights matters. Women rights matters. And everything else that they have done. I can agree for everyone that ALL lives matters does not matter your background, culture or skin color you matter and God bless you.

[4evernessa]

Ofc as a black woman myself. I wholeheartedly agree with everything I would participate myself in the protests if not for my fear of death and in turn Corona. But overall I do. I feel that people aren't really treated equally as some people seem to think. In the us it's more obvious but here it's more slight and obviously this bed to change. If LGBT people can be treated fairly why can't black people. I'm bisexual as well so LGBT community don't come for me

[Reaperbot666]

-regardless of skin tone or ethnic group. we are all still part of the human race.
-pretty much any combination of 1 male and 1 female. blending there genetic material together. will lead to a baby being conceived.
-most men are physically the same on the inside.
-most women are physically the same on the inside.
-most humans have the same color blood.

[humanearth]

Nope, its like the other lives don't matter. Whites, Mexican and all other races don't matter.

Why not just kill everyone thats not black. Because thats how it looks to me. Other races are unless pieces of shit.

That how it looks. Like my white ass life is meaningless and worthless.

[ChatterboxShiv]

If that's how you feel Sir, I'm afraid you need to get therapy. Simply put, Black lives have been oppressed since the start of time. You guys have always had a privilege whether it be desired or not. The BLM movement is to simply wake up the corrupt legal system and open their eyes. All lives matter, yes BUT they don't really matter until black lives matter. Take maths lessons too sir. It's pretty basic maths.

[blank_expression]

BLM is a criminal element masquerading as a righteous movement. It is a branch of the communist left attempting to burn down democracy. After BLM comes the left’s dictatorship and slavery. BLM members will only be the left’s fodder at that point.

[BhaniLovesMusic]

I'm not denying any lives when I say support black lives matters. Because black people are the top list on being hurt, shot, traumatized right now in this world. So my love and support to black people

[StephenCF]

Only for the members who behave or protest reasonably about it 🤷🏻‍♂️ It turns me off when they act aggressively or loot or make someone apologize on their knees for their white privilege (yes, that happened in a video I saw) 🤦🏻‍♂️

[Guanfei]

After being blamed all the last week for something I've never done just because I'm white, no thanks.
I consider everyone equal and will treat people as such unless they give me a reason not to. I won't bow down to a delirious ideology that makes me guilty from birth because of my skin color. THAT is racism.

[sp33d]

No, I don't. All lives matter and we don't need a movement to preach it. All it really is, just preaching. Look at the destruction the more extreme people of this "movement" cause. No lives matter to them, only that there is an excuse to promote anarchy. Fuck them and if you support these idiots, then fuck you, too. Tyvm.

[ChatterboxShiv]

I understand your view point but I don't agree with it. All lives matter, but it is the black people who need to be seen in this very moment. For all lives to matter, their lives have to matter too. It's simple maths.
All lives - Black lives DOESN'T EQUAL All lives
Black lives + The rest of the lives bringing light to this = All lives
Practice what you preach

[ChatterboxShiv]

And yeah there are so many people using this to their own advantage. Fuck them.
BUT
High scale destruction = Corrupt legal system waking up = The world changing for the better

[sp33d]

@ChatterboxShiv The black people have been seen and are seen day in and day out.. well maybe not at night. A group of, coincidentally white, cops who murdered a black man are murderers. Not all police are murderers and not all of them are corrupt. The police is necessary and defunding the police brings no solutions, only problems. The rate of crime will climb and more people will get killed, hence blm contradicts its own purpose. In fact, the fbi statistics show that majority of such murders is the result of black on black crime.

You assume that black lives don't matter, which is why you would need something like blm. Indeed, practice, what you preach. If you truly all of what you preach, then you support anarchy, for this is what blm would bring about should they ever get any significant power.

Your last chain of equalities makes giant leaps: you assume the legal system is corrupt throughout and you mix the world in this. Not our fight. This problem begins and ends in the US.

[ChatterboxShiv]

Okay bro the US is linked to so many countries including mine. It's important to understand that yes, perhaps not all cops are bad BUT the system is rigged and leads them down a path of inevitable violence (in most cases).
Defunding the police is so so so important. People say that black people are "goons" or "thugs" but many of them (alongside other racial groups) act out just to be put in jail where they receive adequate care for themselves. That is how dire the situation is.
People are protesting in order for this idea to reach peoples ears (like a sht load of people in this string). We know BLM but others refuse to understand it. To hear it. We are not hypocrites but we stand for the truth.

[sp33d]

@ChatterboxShiv People are protesting because they either have no idea what they're protesting for and just going with the flow OR they, similarly to you, hold extremist views that have nothing to do with reality. The sooner this nonsense ends, the better.

You are a hypocrite. You preach blm and their "anti-hate" campaign while spreading hate, yourself. You really have no clue what you are saying.

[Hypnos0929]

Yes, there are bad members but that is to be expected with any political organization.
I would also like to point out the people calling it a "terrorist organization" are laughable. The FBI refuses to even call the KKK a terrorist group but BLM is?

[007kingifrit]

no, they have no legitimate cause. black people are NOT killed by police at disproportionate rates

a total of 3 unarmed black men were killed by police in 2019 who were not resisting arrest in some way

in the past week 17+ black people have been killed

good job team, you're worse than doing nothing

[SilverRain92]

If we are talking about peaceful protests I surely support it because they face with discrimination. But I think that lives of Asians, Native Americans, Black Africans, Arabs, Indians, whites and the life of every person living on Earth matter as well.

[Anonymous]

Why would I support a group that just makes a bunch of excuses for people's actions instead of making them take responsibility? Also why doesn't black lives matter even mention the 95% of blacks that are killed by blacks? There's only one reason. It doesn't fit into the victim narrative that they push.

[keno_ke]

Exactly. For example, in my city, 3 black teens were killed in a month. Guess who killed them? Other black teens. They were outside late at night, with guns, and selling drugs. Nobody protested. But now my whole city is protesting for BLM because it's something they can blame white people for. They couldn't blame white people when those 3 black teens where killed by other black teens. So they kept silent then.

[keno_ke]

@Hypnos0929 But BLM is against the violence of black people. It doesn't focus solely on police brutality towards black people.

[007kingifrit]

@keno_ke bullshit it exclusively focuses on police

[keno_ke]

@007kingifrit Still, black people don't want to protest or get involved when it's black on black crime. Their most argument is, "Black people don't kill black people because of racism." So? Just because it's not racism, doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. They're basically saying black lives matter... only when it involves racism.

[Opinion Owner]

@keno_ke Even worse, they assume if a white person kills one of them, it is automatically racism. In reality, white people kill black people for the same reasons black people do.

[ChatterboxShiv]

@keno_ke Have you ever thought about the multiple white people who kill other whites. Same with all other races. These are pretty invalid arguments but you do you.

[Djaay]

No... Extremist occult , but all lives matter instead. The funny part is , here in Honolulu there trying to march for black lives matter , but our police in the Islands are very respectful and basically treat others professionally and constitutionally as humans should. The extremist will impact they're intentional meandering of the victim card racial card to cause whatever problem they. An wether it exist or not.

[Anonymous]

Yes but I feel like black people always take things way too far and love the victim role. I’ve seen Instagram posts where black people are coming at people who are “standing with them” asking for brand to “donate more” and for these brands to “employ more blacks”. It makes them seem ungrateful and highlights more of the victim mentality than a victor mentality.

[Opinion Owner]

Brands*

[John_Doesnt]

They are not violent terrorists despite what conservatives are claiming. Most are peaceful protests, but Fox News and racist retards are claiming all of them are violent.

[A_Bell]

I don't like anything that divides us by race, even if it has good intentions. Unfortunately, I think many do not have good intentions and want to project their own racism onto others.

[Cocacolaaddict]

Generally I support the concept of the message that black people have just as much value as I white however I often find myself sympathizing with the hardships of black people only to read the black comments about white people "white people are trash" "white people should be shot" right after that any sympathy I had for black people has just gone

[menina]

I'm not American, I don't live in the US but I do support BLM. As a black woman who lives in a racist country I would be insane if I didn't support this movement.

[MementoMori_]

NO! They are thugs trying to glorify crime, violence and victimism.

[not329446]

I support the drive for reform but there is the majority that wants to ignore or forget the crimes that preceded police brutality. If you address only the brutality and ignore the underlying crimes the movement is worthless.

[reptocarl2]

Fuck no. Are they special? They already have legal discrimination called affirmative action. Wtf more do they want? They’re nothing but a violent militia movement so they can have immunity from anything

[1CentWorth]

Black lives matter. But especially All lives matter. But especially black lives matter. but especially all lives mater. but especially black lives matter.

[honestGUY45]

Come on, I can only pick 👍or 👎. Especially...

[Supergirl2000]

@honestGUY45 fr he probably scared what feedback he might get

[purplepoppy]

No. The fact that they're rioting and looting proves they don't think other people's lives matter so why should I care for theirs.

[Edanurus]

I feel like the majority of BLM is rich white kids making things harder for all communities especially the ones that they claim to be fighting for. Mostly because to them a protest is like going to see your favourite band.

[MDollarBill]

Cops are not anti-black. They are anti-criminal. It's just that the vast majority of criminals happen to be black. (Or vise versa, if you prefer.) Before you start screaming. Look at the g-d statistics! Hate the Truth much?

[Aislin9]

I do. It feels like the right choice to support it because it is the right choice. I don't have any conflicting feelings about it.

[Grond21]

No, I don't. I support an end to all racism, and this movement only exacerbates racism. They are also very hypocritical.

I answered this question more in depth on another question recently.

[BlessedDaddy]

When did they not matter? This sounds like a self esteem issue to me.

[honestGUY45]

I don't think it matters to them when they are killed by their own. Case in point, Chicago.

[BlessedDaddy]

Killed by their own? Their own what?

Our beliefs, values, behaviour, all of what we are and what we do it up to the individual, even if they are purple. So let the law enforcement enforce and the courts decide the punishment. Everyone needs to start doing a little more self discovery and work on their own shit. You can't fix another person. You can either help them or walk away. Talking about it, complaining and judging is just a way to avoid dealing with our own anger issues. Which in part is why this rioting is happening. Frustration.

And we claim to live in a free country. People should be free enough to fuck up and make mistakes and do the wrong thing. Everyone does.

Racism, in part, is one race believing they are superior to another.

That would mean that everyone who judges anyone of another race is probably guilty of racism. Like saying, "They are idiots, I wouldn't do that". How do you know what you would do unless you were put in the exact same situation? You can't because it hasn't happened. And please no, I know exactly what I would do? No, if your not black, you have no idea what your talking about.

You are giving a prime example of one reason why some, not even close to all, African Americans have a gripe. Your statement sounds racist in the spirit of separating "them from us". So that makes white people my own? Trust me, just because someones white doesn't mean I don't think they may be an idiot and that I'm better than they are. At that point in not acctually racist, I'm just an asshole.

You may have written that and not even considered that your words might have a racist tone. That goes for a lot of people, including police officers.

There are good people and bad, white and black, smart and ignorant. And they all make their own choices. If we çoukd do that, color wouldn't be at the forefront.

[honestGUY45]

You know exactly what I'm talking about when I say 'killed by their own'. I answered your question of 'when did they not matter' and you didn't like my answer because the truth and anyone who speaks it, is racist. People are free in this country to fuck up and make mistakes and do the wrong thing. Then there are consequences and if they can't handle them, they should get their shit together and stop fucking up. As for your racism criteria, I believe everyone is racist in one way or another based on the decisions they make. That doesn't make them bad people. There are many facets to something being racist. I consider EVERYTHING I say and write.

[dmvgirl16]

Yes I support this movement because I am against racism and discrimination

[DrMeow]

All innocent lives matter (regardless of gender, race, ethnicity etc)

[Rangers]

Absolutely not, they're a terrorist organization that needs to be held accountable for their actions.

[pervertedjester]

I support Justice and Equality for All.

Anything less than that is a waste of effort

[A_madi6]

I support the case of justice for Geroge but I don't support the movement because destroying their country is wrong

[RydiaMagnifique]

I used to oppose it. But after becoming more socially liberal, I started supporting it more.

[SomeGuyCalledTom]

In spirit yes, but in terms of actually taking supportive action, nah, i mind my own business for the most part

[chriscdi]

the normal stuff yea, i got no problem with all the protests and stuff but all the riots and shit, nah

[hawtsauce987]

Yes. Though, only those who aren't responding with violence. Lots of people are chanting DEAD COPS DEAD COPS. Your chlldren are at home you monster! Be considerate to them!

[888theGreat]

all lives matter, all races are murdered , robbed , and abused. Police beat the hell out of Hispanics, whites, and black people. To say just one race is hunted down and killed is not accurate.

[TallAnon]

Not particularly, that takes me prioritizing one colour above another, I don't play that game. You're all the same to me, humans. I support "Let's try not to be arseholes to eachother".

[Gisellehappy]

Are you serious? I don’t think you understand the movement lol I’m not black but I support the black lives matter movement that’s fighting for equal rights

[TallAnon]

Totally serious, I'm not helping anyone over anyone else. I'm also not a feminist for the same reason.
All of you are getting treated the same to me, if that's not enough, reconsider why.

[Gisellehappy]

But that’s the problem for them, they’re not getting treated equally but the police. So they’re saying “black lives matter” just like anyone else’s. Do you get it now?
Feminists are also fighting for the same rights, not saying “we’re better”.

Dumbass.

[Gisellehappy]

By**

[TallAnon]

I'm not retarded in some way that I don't understand the concept, I'm saying I don't actively support that. By law, we are equal. The difference in society is how we treat and see eachother. Protesting just draws attention to the difference, rather just see them as equals and that's it.