Support NeoGAF

[thiscoldblack]

What a disappointment. Storming the stage, don't even let the man talk, and then disrespect him and the whole crowd who was eager to listen to Bernie talk. I'm very sure the man would give these women some time to speak if they could've asked in a respectful manner. I don't think Bernie would be a person not to support the movement considering his stance seen across several decades. If anything, these two women shouldn't represent the movement and the movement as a whole should disapprove of this kind of behavior. It doesn't send a positive message or really help the movement at all and what only does is makes Bernie looks terrible in the media.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

The writer is a black grassroots activist.

Even better, a special snowflake. Doesn't change what I said.

If he thinks he can do so much better, than he can form his own movement.


But it's becoming all too clear that many of you just don't give a fuck about what we have to say. I've been trying in detail to explain what Bernie did wrong, how he's improved, and why this has led to a rift, and again and again, people are more than happy to de-legitimatize everything that has transpired since the death of Trayvon (which is when BLM actually started). Because it clashed with their fave.

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Even better, a special snowflake. Doesn't change what I said.

If he thinks he can do so much better, than he can form his own movement.


But it's becoming all too clear that many of you just don't give a fuck about what we have to say.

Here is the blog's About the Author snippet.

Douglas Williams originally hails from Suffolk, Virginia. He is a third-generation organizer, having a grandmother who worked to integrate the schools in his hometown and a father who continues to be active in labor organizing. He earned his BA in Political Science at the University of Minnesota at Morris in 2008, as well as his MPA at the University of Missouri Columbia in 2011, where he was also a Thurgood Marshall Fellow and a Stanley Botner Fellow. He is a political junkie that follows everything from elections in Jamaica and Saskatchewan to social movements in Latin America. He is currently a doctoral student in political science at Wayne State University in Detroit, where his research centers around public policy as it relates to disadvantaged communities and the labor movement.

 

[Interfectum]

Even better, a special snowflake. Doesn't change what I said.

If he thinks he can do so much better, than he can form his own movement.


But it's becoming all too clear that many of you just don't give a fuck about what we have to say.

It's also becoming clear you have a narrative in your head about "white liberals" and Bernie Sanders and nothing will change that.

 

[Train of Midnight]

The writer is a black grassroots activist.

Stay Gold, Kamikaze.

 

[samn]

Even better, a special snowflake. Doesn't change what I said.

Well, what exactly did you say, because I heard an awful lot of name-calling and very little response to what the article actually said. I'm not going to agree with you just because I should feel guilty about being a white lefty. Me disagreeing with someone doesn't mean I'm 'paternalistic', it just means I hold a different view.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Here is the blog's About the Author snippet.

Ok, that's great. He has quite the resume. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

 

[Mobile Suit Gooch]

I'm sorry guys.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Well, what exactly did you say, because I heard an awful lot of name-calling and very little response to what the article actually said. I'm not going to agree with you just because I should feel guilty about being a white lefty. Me disagreeing with someone doesn't mean I'm 'paternalistic', it just means I hold a different view.

If you want or care, I'll explain why I disagree with the article.

 

[samn]

If you want or care, I'll explain why I disagree with the article.

Yes please.

Typical

I still haven't seen a good source on that. Soros is a typical target for conspiracy theories.

 

[WorldStar]

BLM is funded by Soros, a huge Clinton supporter.

Typical

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Ok, that's great. He has quite the resume. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

Genuine question: what do you think about what he says about the divide between #blacklivesmatter and the wider black working-class community? It seems very plausible to me because I think you see something very similar in the feminist movement, where a large amount (obviously not all) of feminist activists come from relatively wealthy and relatively privileged backgrounds, and focus on issues like pornography and gender normative toys, rather than issues which affect working class women or women of colour like child care access and how part-time jobs are largely exploitative of women.

Do you think he might have a point that the middle-class section of the racial equality movement might be so focused on issues like body cameras and microaggressions that they fail to represent what black working-class community want - primarily economic liberation? I mean, he provides reasonable evidence to back this view up, citing this report.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I'd really appreciate if soleil would straight-up remove that post or at least edit it to clarify that the only sources that back up the idea are very right-wing in nature

Genuine question: what do you think about what he says about the divide between #blacklivesmatter and the wider black working-class community? It seems very plausible to me because I think you see something very similar in the feminist movement, where a large amount (obviously not all) of feminist activists come from relatively wealthy and relatively privileged backgrounds, and focus on issues like pornography and gender normative toys, rather than issues which affect working class women or women of colour like child care access and how part-time jobs are largely exploitative of women.

Do you think he might have a point that the middle-class section of the racial equality movement might be so focused on issues like body cameras and microaggressions that they fail to represent what black working-class community want - primarily economic liberation? I mean, he provides reasonable evidence to back this view up, citing this report.

I don't know if there's any evidence to argue that much of the BLM protesters don't care about economic problems. It's also a very different situation because criticisms of feminism often come from that it rejects POC feminism, not that feminism is about sex positivity or gender roles.

 

[werks]

Ok, that's great. He has quite the resume. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

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.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Here is a new post from The South Lawn, which I've posted before in this thread.



Powerful stuff, really a blog I'd suggest following closely this election cycle.

the writer seems to have taken ALL the things I think and written a beautiful piece out of it.

 

[JustenP88]

Here is a new post from The South Lawn, which I've posted before in this thread.


Powerful stuff, really a blog I'd suggest following closely this election cycle.

Wait, was it one of the protesters talking about "weirdo populist economic determinism"? That sounds like pseudo-intellectual conservative rhetoric if I've ever heard it. Or maybe I have no idea what the fuck she's trying to say with that. It reads more like free market fetishism than #blacklivesmatter.

 

[sphagnum]

I feel like I'm seeing two different factions of the same orientation arguing that we need to be intersectional and then missing the point.

 

[samn]

I feel like I'm seeing two different factions of the same orientation arguing that we need to be intersectional and then missing the point.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[A Link to the Past]

Can't we all just get along?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I don't know if there's any evidence to argue that much of the BLM protesters don't care about economic problems. It's also a very different situation because criticisms of feminism often come from that it rejects POC feminism, not that feminism is about sex positivity or gender roles.

I don't think it is entirely different to feminism. Yes, there is a criticism of many feminist activists for not being aware of the problems facing specifically women of colour, but there is also a separate, distinct and equally important criticism of many feminist activists for not being aware of the problems facing specifically poor and working-class women.

I'm also think there's a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest that #blacklivesmatter protestors are disproportionately concerned with non-economic matters relative to their 'constituency'. Alicia Garza can be cited as one (admittedly anecdotal) example, but in general the fact stands out that #blacklivesmatter has focused on Sanders much more heavily than any other presidential candidate for being out of touch when, on an issue by issue basis, he presents exactly the sort of policies that black working-class communities typically support.

I mean, to quote:

Black people, in poll after poll, seem to really care about this “weirdo populist economic determinism” stuff, since they consistently list things like education, the economy, and income inequality at the top of their policy concerns. As for police violence, a Gallup poll came out earlier this week that showed Black people reported feeling no more mistreated by police today than they did two decades ago (and that percentage is actually down seven percent from the 2004 survey).

You'd think that given this, the main focus of the #blacklivesmatter movement would be to focus on things that matter most to black lives - and that's economic issues. But #blacklivesmatter has been strangely silent on this.

 

[matmanx1]

Why don't they you know...target some Republican rallies? You know, the people that really need to realize that, hey black lives DO matter.

Granted I wouldn't blame them if they were fearful if they did since...well..........you know.

Oh come on. This is stereotyping at it's worst. Not all Republicans dis minorities and not all Democrats work to raise minorities. You can be a fiscal conservative and therefore identify more with the Republican party and still hate racism. There are as many different "flavors" of Republican as there are of Democrat and neither party can claim to have a spotless record when it comes to dealing fairly with minorities.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

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.

 

[samn]

Oh come on. This is stereotyping at it's worst. Not all Republicans dis minorities and not all Democrats work to raise minorities. You can be a fiscal conservative and therefore identify more with the Republican party and still hate racism.

I know I do.

Absolutely, but aren't Republican candidates generally worse on these issues?

In any case, I can see why someone might target a candidate considered to be 'more on their side'. They might feel they have a better chance of their issue being heard.

@Kid Kamikaze10, you make a good argument.

 

[Boke1879]

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.

Bernie should definitely want to be challenged and it's time black people finally challenged one of their candidates despite his record. I say again. Too much lip service has been given from the left to the black community.

Not calling out anyone in this thread but i've seen many Bernie supporters on twitter and facebook claim they no longer support the movement because of this. Once I see that I have to question how good of an ally they were in the first place.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

There are stuff BLM needs to do to improve it's movement, yes. I won't deny it.

But the uproar that's surfaced since netroots and up? That is not the source I'd use to build on it, evolve it. I'd rather see some internal critiques be used first, like the lack of coverage of women and LGBTs related deaths, or yes, using the resources for more community outreach.

There are some that are more political, like MLK jr, but others like Stokely and Malcolm and the Deacons and the Panthers. They can all have space. Be builders rather than destroyers.

And I don't think those women protesting were aiming to destroy Sanders' campaign, but to highlight an area they believe he should bring greater focus to, community outreach (aiming for more diverse audiences) as well as the further promoting the fight against racial injustice.

And Bernie is now doing both.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Man, white liberal paternalism in a fucking nutshell.

Do you guys even want to hear from us black activists?


Or are we completely meaningless if we don't entirely fall in line. Or in this case, want more minority/community outreach from Sanders?

How one can read that argument and come to the conclusion that white liberals don't want to hear from black activists...I have no idea. And I say that as someone who has a variety of problems with white liberals.

This isn't about falling in line or bowing down to Sanders and his infinite wisdom. It's a pretty simple conversation about goals and policy. The dominant problem in the black community is socioeconomic, and the product of institutional racism. That's a fact. It's not police violence or black on black crime - if anything, both are symptoms of the underlining disease/problem. There is no magic wand to wave to end police brutality, or end racism, or racial profiles, or any of the other broad, fantasy demands BLM makes.

If you want to improve the black community you have to address the socioeconomic impediments that hold it back. It's hard to invest in communities or fix schools in areas with a crumbling tax base due to unemployment or low wages. Living wages address that. Universal pre-K addresses that. Access to free or affordable college and vocational schools addresses that. Ending the war on drugs addresses that. If you want to "fix" police problems, get them off the streets in high volume. And the best way you can do that effectively is by lowering crime - again, ending the war on drugs amongst other things.

It won't be perfect - there are a lot of low education jobs that simply aren't coming back to America, making it hard to revive many urban and rural areas. But this is how you start to change things. Demanding police stop killing people is not a plan. Police killing people is the end result of the redlining and restriction of basic services that has turned many inner cities into killing fields. Fixing or improving the underlining problems is the best way to address this shit. Even body cams are ultimately a half measure when compared to what truly needs to be done.

But apparently none of this is of interest to some in the BLM movement; surely if it was of interest there wouldn't be so much anger aimed at a fucking socialist. I say that not as a Sanders supporter - I'm not - but by someone baffled and embarrassed by the emotional tantrum that's going on.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Bernie should definitely want to be challenged and it's time black people finally challenged one of their candidates despite his record. I say again. Too much lip service has been given from the left to the black community.

Not calling out anyone in this thread but i've seen many Bernie supporters on twitter and facebook claim they no longer support the movement because of this. Once I see that I have to question how good of an ally they were in the first place.

"ally" is a process, not an identity, and there's a difference between an ally and an audience member.

One of them is deep in the trenches with you far more often.

 

[soleil]

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.

So how does dismissing him as a paternalistic white liberal help in the goals you mention?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

So how does dismissing him as a paternalistic white liberal help in the goals you mention?

No, it doesn't. I said that because I was pissed off. I apologize.


That was me being angrily dismissive in a thread where many, many people have been just as dismissive or worse about the causes I fight for or support.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

How one can read that argument and come to the conclusion that white liberals don't want to hear from black activists...I have no idea. And I say that as someone who has a variety of problems with white liberals.

This isn't about falling in line or bowing down to Sanders and his infinite wisdom. It's a pretty simple conversation about goals and policy. The dominant problem in the black community is socioeconomic, and the product of institutional racism. That's a fact. It's not police violence or black on black crime - if anything, both are symptoms of the underlining disease/problem. There is no magic wand to wave to end police brutality, or end racism, or racial profiles, or any of the other broad, fantasy demands BLM makes.

If you want to improve the black community you have to address the socioeconomic impediments that hold it back. It's hard to invest in communities or fix schools in areas with a crumbling tax base due to unemployment or low wages. Living wages address that. Universal pre-K addresses that. Access to free or affordable college and vocational schools addresses that. Ending the war on drugs addresses that. If you want to "fix" police problems, get them off the streets in high volume. And the best way you can do that effectively is by lowering crime - again, ending the war on drugs amongst other things.

It won't be perfect - there are a lot of low education jobs that simply aren't coming back to America, making it hard to revive many urban and rural areas. But this is how you start to change things. Demanding police stop killing people is not a plan. Police killing people is the end result of the redlining and restriction of basic services that has turned many inner cities into killing fields. Fixing or improving the underlining problems is the best way to address this shit. Even body cams are ultimately a half measure when compared to what truly needs to be done.

But apparently none of this is of interest to some in the BLM movement; surely if it was of interest there wouldn't be so much anger aimed at a fucking socialist. I say that not as a Sanders supporter - I'm not - but by someone baffled and embarrassed by the emotional tantrum that's going on.

I feel very similarly to this post and would be interested to see responses to it.

 

[soleil]

No, it doesn't. I said that because I was pissed off. I apologize.


That was me being dismissive in a thread where many, many people have been just as dismissive or worse about the causes I fight for or support.

Let's work together with Bernie. Choose the best candidate and then work with him. Don't worship him, don't vilify him either, just work with him. He's the best choice because the other choice was pushing the "tough on crime" policies that led to a huge of the problem in the first place.

 

[PhoenixDark]

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.

A handful of corrupt cops have lost their jobs, and some body cams have been implemented. Congratulations.

Racism largely expresses itself economically. That has always been the case, especially in America. The best way to keep a race or class down is by restricting their access to basic services, jobs, opportunity, education, etc. That's the point of institutional racism.

 

[A Link to the Past]

A handful of corrupt cops have lost their jobs, and some body cams have been implemented. Congratulations.

Racism largely expresses itself economically. That has always been the case, especially in America. The best way to keep a race or class down is by restricting their access to basic services, jobs, opportunity, education, etc. That's the point of institutional racism.

But it's not the only problem. It's certainly not as though well-to-do POC in America don't become a target either.

 

[Train of Midnight]

No, it doesn't. I said that because I was pissed off. I apologize.


That was me being angrily dismissive in a thread where many, many people have been just as dismissive or worse about the causes I fight for or support.

I can't speak for the rest of GAF, but I dismiss you and your posts because you have no consideration for the facts of the matter. We had a decent back and forth in the last BLM thread and there's just no getting through to you. From what I can see, there's simply no reconciliation in your mind between between what you see and how things are. I support your cause but I condemn your resentment of reason.

But it's not the only problem. It's certainly not as though well-to-do POC in America don't become a target either.

Sure, but in terms of helping the most people, and the people who need help the most, economic solutions to these problems achieves that.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I can't speak for the rest of GAF, but I dismiss you and your posts because you have no consideration for the facts of the matter. We had a decent back and forth in the last BLM thread and there's just no getting through to you. From what I can see, there's simply no reconciliation in your mind between between what you see and how things are. I support your cause but I condemn your resentment of reason.

Is it not also possible though that what you consider reasonable is perhaps colored by your perception?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

How one can read that argument and come to the conclusion that white liberals don't want to hear from black activists...I have no idea. And I say that as someone who has a variety of problems with white liberals.

Because he made it clear that he wants BLM shut down.

This isn't about falling in line or bowing down to Sanders and his infinite wisdom. It's a pretty simple conversation about goals and policy. The dominant problem in the black community is socioeconomic, and the product of institutional racism. That's a fact. It's not police violence or black on black crime - if anything, both are symptoms of the underlining disease/problem. There is no magic wand to wave to end police brutality, or end racism, or racial profiles, or any of the other broad, fantasy demands BLM makes.

But there is an immediate way to prevent the vast amount of deaths of unarmed black people: hold police accountable. Whether that means through a new branch of government, or forcing the government to scrutinize their police departments more.

Your solutions will take a while. Far longer than the droves of people being killed.

If you want to improve the black community you have to address the socioeconomic impediments that hold it back. It's hard to invest in communities or fix schools in areas with a crumbling tax base due to unemployment or low wages. Living wages address that. Universal pre-K addresses that. Access to free or affordable college and vocational schools addresses that. Ending the war on drugs addresses that. If you want to "fix" police problems, get them off the streets in high volume. And the best way you can do that effectively is by lowering crime - again, ending the war on drugs amongst other things.

I agree with all of this.

Demanding police stop killing people is not a plan.

This? I don't. Because everything else you're saying aren't going to stop them. Not in any healthy time table. In the interim, immediate changes in how these situations are addressed need to be made. And through BLM, are slowly being made.

Fixing or improving the underlining problems is the best way to address this shit. Even body cams are ultimately a half measure when compared to what truly needs to be done.

It is, but until then, other more immediate measures need to be demanded to be administered.

But apparently none of this is of interest to some in the BLM movement; surely if it was of interest there wouldn't be so much anger aimed at a fucking socialist. I say that not as a Sanders supporter - I'm not - but by someone baffled and embarrassed by the emotional tantrum that's going on.

And this is just you being frustrated, because how do you know it's not in the interest of people working in BLM?

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Is it not also possible though that what you consider reasonable is perhaps colored by your perception?

Exactly

Train of Midnight, if you have a problem with me. That's fine. I won't address you. But don't throw around the word facts to hide your opinions/claims under.

 

[jakonovski]

But apparently none of this is of interest to some in the BLM movement; surely if it was of interest there wouldn't be so much anger aimed at a fucking socialist. I say that not as a Sanders supporter - I'm not - but by someone baffled and embarrassed by the emotional tantrum that's going on.

This, to me, is evidence of the power of the American propaganda machine. Whatever remains of the left these days has twisted itself into a pretzel to avoid the label of socialist, because the word has been demonized for decades.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

But the government won't scrutinize police departments more carefully until they feel like they have a reason to care about black people, and those reasons are largely economic (interest groups drive politics), so while you're selling #blacklivesmatter as something that can make an immediate impact, I simply don't think that's true. The fact body cameras are catching on has as much to do with the burgeoning lobbying industry that can make a huge profit off producing and selling body cameras to the government (see: Taser International, which has puts millions into lobbying for body cameras but also produces weapons that are responsible for black deaths to begin with) as it does with #blacklivesmatter. This happens to be one of those rare areas where corporate interests and racial equality interest overlap, it would probably have gone ahead regardless.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

But the government won't scrutinize police departments more carefully until they feel like they have a reason to care about black people, and those reasons are largely economic (interest groups drive politics), so while you're selling #blacklivesmatter as something that can make an immediate impact, I simply don't think that's true. The fact body cameras are catching on has as much to do with the burgeoning lobbying industry that can make a huge profit off producing and selling body cameras to the government (see: Taser International, which has puts millions into lobbying for body cameras but also produces weapons that are responsible for black deaths to begin with) as it does with #blacklivesmatter. This happens to be one of those rare areas where corporate interests and racial equality interest overlap, it would probably have gone ahead regardless.

Hey, if you feel like downplaying the impact of BLM, go right ahead. Clearly nobody is stopping anyone from doing that here.

But if they weren't around, I don't think there would be a conversation. Nevermind any actions, or any politicians really addressing it beyond I guess Sanders (who would put it far behind economic interests).

 

[Interfectum]

But it's not the only problem. It's certainly not as though well-to-do POC in America don't become a target either.

If you are trying to get inside the mind of a racist, I would say that's still linked to economics.

Hell even when Obama is being trashed by racists they make sure to mention is poor roots.

I think a lot of wealthy POC are looked at as people who got lucky, got helped out by liberals and are only in their position because of programs like affirmative action and the like.

Economic equality won't stop people from being racist assholes but it will erode a lot of old racist assumptions over time.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Hey, if you feel like downplaying the impact of BLM, go right ahead. Clearly nobody is stopping anyone from doing that here.

But if they weren't around, I don't think there would be a conversation. Nevermind any actions.

Why? Body cameras are made by corporations and sold at a large profit margin. They'd have become widespread for the same reason that police militarization with equipment like tanks has become widespread: it fuels a burgeoning industry that has the money to lobby for these things. Body cameras have been implemented before the #blacklivesmatter movement even took hold; Colorado, Connecticut and Illinois all began the legislative process to introduce body cameras before Michael Brown was even shot.

Note: this isn't saying body cameras are bad, they're obviously not. It *is* saying that their introduction is largely prompted by economic reasoning, not genuine concern for black American treatment. It is also saying that this a single example of a wider phenomenon: black Americans only see their problems being addressed when elites have economic reasons to do. Racial inequality is perpetuated by the fact America's entire economy is deeply racist. Why are there no popular and highly visible racial equality movements that focus on economic matters?

 

[Train of Midnight]

Is it not also possible though that what you consider reasonable is perhaps colored by your perception?

Definitely, but I think it's more a matter of pragmatism vs idealism, whereas I favor pragmatism.

 

[A Link to the Past]

And there were rear-view cameras before too - that does not negate the impact that was made by people who called for their increased and standardized implementation.

Definitely, but I think it's more a matter of pragmatism vs idealism, whereas I favor pragmatism.

And I feel that people in this discussion are too unwilling to accept that maybe the "appropriate answer" (whatever it is) lies somewhere in the middle and not at one of two extreme ends.

 

[FiggyCal]

Because he made it clear that he wants BLM shut down.



But there is an immediate way to prevent the vast amount of deaths of unarmed black people: hold police accountable. Whether that means through a new branch of government, or forcing the government to scrutinize their police departments more.

Your solutions will take a while. Far longer than the droves of people being killed.



I agree with all of this.



This? I don't. Because everything else you're saying aren't going to stop them. Not in any healthy time table. In the interim, immediate changes in how these situations are addressed need to be made. And through BLM, are slowly being made.



It is, but until then, other more immediate measures need to be demanded to be administered.



And this is just you being frustrated, because how do you know it's not in the interest of people working in BLM?

Ultimately, more accountable police and harsher punishments for police don't solve the issue of why it is the police view people as the enemy in the first place (particularly people of color). That's why Bernie supports community policing.

But unaccountable police is not at all one of the biggest issues facing black Americans. It really is all about economics. Systemic oppression, poverty and the government intentionally implementing policies that hurt them won't be solved by more police accountability. It's even more ineffective when the movement completely ignores the republican party.

 

[The Technomancer]

Definitely, but I think it's more a matter of pragmatism vs idealism, whereas I favor pragmatism.

Pragmatism gets you limited results. If you're protesting, you don't civilly ask for 50% in two years, because then you maybe get 20% in five years. You loudly demand 100% now and maybe you'll get 50% in two years

 

[JustenP88]

Is there any sort of transcript or more comprehensive quotes of what the protesters had to say? Not crying conspiracy or anything, but some of the quotes that have been attributed to them sound like some serious conservative rhetoric. It's possible (I guess) for someone to advocate for social/black equality while holding conservative economic ideals. However, it's starting to sound to me like they have more of a problem with Bernie's economics than anything else based on the little that I've heard from them.

What do you say to a BLM activist who thinks that the minimum wage should be abolished, flat tax is great and health care isn't a right? Not saying they for sure hold such views, I'm just extrapolating stereotypical conservative ideals from some of the puzzling language they used. To me, that stuff seems so antithetical to the movement no matter how you slice it.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Ultimately, more accountable police and harsher punishments for police don't solve the issue of why it is the police view people as the enemy in the first place (particularly people of color). That's why Bernie supports community policing.

But unaccountable police is not at all one of the biggest issues facing black Americans. It really is all about economics. Systemic oppression, poverty and the government intentionally implementing policies that hurt them won't be solved by more police accountability. It's even more ineffective when the movement completely ignores the republican party.

Often, hurting people economically is a tool of oppression, not the beginning and the end. If there was a system put in place that fixed shit for the downtrodden of America in a way that elevated many black people, the people who perpetuated the harm would find another way to execute it. It happens all through history - when slavery was abolished, we saw black people arrested for bullshit reasons and put into forced labour, for instance. It's not uncommon for racially motivated hate to become more powerful as more progress is made.

 

[Train of Midnight]

Pragmatism gets you limited results. If you're protesting, you don't civilly ask for 50% in two years, because then you maybe get 20% in five years. You loudly demand 100% now and maybe you'll get 50% in two years

Sounds more like pessimism than anything else

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Pragmatism gets you limited results. If you're protesting, you don't civilly ask for 50% in two years, because then you maybe get 20% in five years. You loudly demand 100% now and maybe you'll get 50% in two years

Oversimplifying things a bit? Yikes.

Using that same vague logic its also reasonable to argue that pragmatism is essential in an election season to ensure a candidate is actually electable and not simply an idealist that fails to connect and resonate with the majority voting bloc.