That's not what happened. You dismissed him as a paternalistic white liberal. The irony of dismissing a black activist while at the same time complaining about white liberals not listening to black activists.
Do you know why I did it?
Because his stance is one I've heard from numerous white liberals already. And the same article has been parroted by white liberals already.
The goal is usually the same. To shut down BLM.
As for the actual response. He comes from a POV I don't agree with; a primarily Marxist/socialist one that says economy above all. I know the end goal is wealth equality, that's not denied by anyone in BLM. No activist denies that without wealth equality and decent programs for minorities, things won't change. And many of us do work to help close those gaps.
But people are dying now, and racism is not economically based. It's power based. Power can exist even when the money is even. The end goal has always been to stop the mass incarceration and mass deaths of black people from state violence. To hold cops accountable.
Without the work BLM has already done, body cams wouldn't even be in the conversation. Corrupt cops would still have their jobs. Comfy in their jobs.
More is to be done, but to try to shut down the whole movement because they aren't making the progress you'd want them too? Because they went after your fave due to his lack of minority outreach?
That's garbage. Yes, the media has spotlighted a few activists, that doesn't mean they just stopped fight not just state violence, but also wealth inequality. He wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater, deny many black folks who have used BLM as their voice because it's not fitting what he wants out of it.
Bernie is a great candidate. He needs to be stronger and do more minority outreach, but I like him a lot. What I don't like is this idea that BLM must support him at all times, or they must fall. That's bullshit, and I don't think even Bernie wants that.