An honest question: whose campaign events or public speeches were disrupted by MLK? I am certainly not a student of the era, but most of the notable civil disobedience I can recall were boycotts, sit-ins, and marches that were designated, independent events. They weren't attempts to disrupt, co-opt, or upstage someone else at their own separate speech or rally.
Black Lives Matter supporters interrupt Hillary Clinton Rally
- Thread starter docbon
- Start date
- Status
An honest question: whose campaign events or public speeches were disrupted by MLK? I am certainly not a student of the era, but most of the notable civil disobedience I can recall were boycotts, sit-ins, and marches that were designated, independent events. They weren't attempts to disrupt, co-opt, or upstage someone else at their own separate speech or rally.
benjipwns
Banned
If everyone is in prison either as a guard or a prisoner (ideally both) we won't have any unemployment!
nephilimdj
Member
Seems like she handled it well in the video
Prototype Viktor
Member
Use a reality TV show to get your own or become The Miz
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Protests, by their very nature, are meant to disrupt.
Sit ins, one of the examples you gave, when they were originally were introduced, were seen as a major disruptions and seen as too radical, even by liberals at the time.
In any case, why do we have to protest the way King did? What King did clearly didn't work, as we are still in the same situation. Why should we repeat the past?
Cindi Mayweather
Member
It wasn't closed door. There was a video, and she dismissed it with "wait your turn" nonsense.
Closed-door does not mean secret, it means private. It was a private meeting with a BLM person taking video.
What are you talking about with "wait your turn nonsense"? As I recall from that video, she pretty explicitly said "Okay, what policy proposals do you have?"
Cindi Mayweather
Member
From my memory, it certainly felt like "wait your turn."
And I don't see why not protest Hilary? Her policies are very anti-black and are pretty Republican.
Aaron Strife
Banned
She told them simply that past successful civil rights movements (women's suffrage, racial equality, LGBT rights etc.) have pushed clear legislative proposals onto lawmakers who then pass the law, and that if they did that they would get the attention they deserve. It wasn't "Wait your turn," it was "What do you want me to do?"
I support the Black Lives Matter movement, but in the early stages she was right that there were no clear policy goals. "End police brutality." Okay, how? I understand there have been some proposals since then and I haven't been paying much attention to the movement but there should be an effort to lobby state lawmakers to implement specific reforms.
She pretty much just asked them what she wanted her to do policy-wise. I'm not saying that this makes her immune to BLM protests, but she gave them a legitimate meeting with someone that could be President.
And she's not a Republican or anti-black, for fuck's sake.
psynergylover
Member
*claps*
Aaron Strife
Banned
Liberals don't care about Congress. Only conservatives seem to understand the way to get things done is through Congress and especially lately, state legislatures.
Well liberals are stupid. Presidents don't change state policies.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Hilary's positions are pretty traditional Republican. Not modern hysterics Republican, but pretty Republican. Her support of prison SuperPACS, is one example. She's very anti-black. The prison system destroys our families.
Tell me how her policies are pro-black. If you want to argue they're neutral towards Black folks, go ahead. But her positions definitely harm Black people directly, from her support of for profit prisons, death penalty, to the drug war.
And im telling you that the existing system hasn't worked. Don't really know how to make this any clearer. Change is change. Stump speeches and finger wagging does nothing for the long term. As history has repeatedly and repeatedly showed.
Unless a person has been living under several rocks, there is nobody who hasnt heard about the BLM movement or the escalating racial tension in this country. This goes doubly for politicians who I think have all been questioned on their positions regarding this.
I don't mind the protest. A show of force can helpful yes. But there is a line between positive reinforcement while getting your message thoughtfully across and being obnoxious and ignorant and dissuading people from wanting to actually give you an ear.
If she acknowledges you and you still attempt to overtalk her and take over her rally before she can even say what she has to say then you have jumped well across that line.
What good has it done your movement if you can now be barred from entering future events?
And I've said nothing about where they're allowed to protest. Time and a place, again. Damaging the image of a candidate thats most likely to help you because she now has to remove you to even get a word off isn't an effective use of your platform. Im sorry but no.
And all that goes without repeating how little a role a president plays in this reform. Obama has called for reform before and nobody jumped. What makes you think this will change with a different talking head? Pressure the people who make laws. Pressure the people who actually have authority over your police. A protest to a person who might be able to sniff a public office in over a years time is going to have what effect exactly?
I really don't see whats so outlandish about wishing they'd choose their battles more wisely.
User 463088
Banned
Name them. Name these anti-black policies that she is running on. Please. I would love to read them.
The very first policy speech Hillary gave after announcing her candidacy was on criminal justice reform and policing.
A single speech means absolutely nothing, but she has been speaking about issues affecting the African American community. When she met with BLM, she asked them what they would like her to do. She's listening. Is she perfect? Nope. Not even close.
benjipwns
Banned
Because they haven't tried doesn't excuse those from not leveraging the power they do have to make things better.
The DoJ cutting a path of destruction through just 25 police departments of decent size will send a message.
MLK's protests were aimed largely at the institutions perpetuating discrimination -- buses, hotels, stores that enforced "whites only" policies. Attempting to undermine potential allies doesn't strike me as particularly fruitful, and the ultimate result may just be increased security at speeches and rallies.
"What King did clearly didn't work" is a pretty grim assessment of the man's accomplishments.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Hilary and speeches doesn't mean much.
She talks about helping the situation with Wall Street while gaining donations from some of the biggest dogs in Wall Street. She gave a speech on prison reform:
And she still is getting millions from pro-profit prisons.
With Hilary, you have to look behind the lines to find the true story. She may say one thing, but the money always tells the truth.
For profit prisons, for death penalty, pro drug war. In my mind, all of these are anti-black positions. It's everything that represents the status quo, and the status quo for black people in this country right now is absymal.
shinra-bansho
Member
So, I don't know if it's worth noting, but the thing I find weird about this protest is that earlier in the month Clinton and BLM/Campaign Zero leaders actually had a sit down meeting to discuss issues and policy.
While I think it's perfectly fine to protest wherever they see fit and draw attention to the problems being faced, I think this kind of highlights that they need to improve their organisational infrastructure and internal communication a bit.
It doesn't really seem like her campaign, or for that matter a Clinton presidency, would be hugely resistant to further such meetings and discussions either, so far as I can tell - which could be more fruitful.
And at some point, as already noted, movements aimed at drawing attention to problems usually need to get involved in the policy development towards creating solutions.
While I think it's perfectly fine to protest wherever they see fit and draw attention to the problems being faced, I think this kind of highlights that they need to improve their organisational infrastructure and internal communication a bit.
It doesn't really seem like her campaign, or for that matter a Clinton presidency, would be hugely resistant to further such meetings and discussions either, so far as I can tell - which could be more fruitful.
And at some point, as already noted, movements aimed at drawing attention to problems usually need to get involved in the policy development towards creating solutions.
Eh im sorry dude but I really don't see you as a valid authority on what previous presidents have tried or not tried to do with this issue. Not saying you are necessarily wrong or right but sometimes you should sit back and realize you are in an armchair and not working on the hill before making grand sweeping generalizations.
Velcro Fly
Member
they need to interrupt state legislature candidates everywhere
because hillary isn't going to be able to do shit with the GOP controlling the house for years to come. they also have many state legislatures and governors.
because hillary isn't going to be able to do shit with the GOP controlling the house for years to come. they also have many state legislatures and governors.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
King's accomplishments? He accomplished a lot, sure. Does this mean he's infallible? No. When I talk about King's accomplishments, I mean the Civil Rights Movement at large. It hasn't changed a thing.
Black Americans are worse off now than in 1960's.
http://www.urban.org/sites/default/...pdfs/412839-The-Moynihan-Report-Revisited.PDF
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-white-economic-gap-hasnt-budged-in-50-years/
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/todays-racial-wealth-gap-is-wider-than-in-the-1960s/[/url]
If the Civil Rights Movement did anything, it was make people complacent.
I also disagree heavily with many of those targets and institutions. We were more interested in integrating than proving that we are equal. We are no longer separate, but you'd be a damn fool if you'd argue we're now equal.
In that respect, the Civil Rights Movement was a failure.
I just get the impression that yelling "black lives matter" is the most important aspect behind Black Lives Matter.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Give me reason to believe in Hilary's racial justice policies? Her track record is abysmal.
shinra-bansho
Member
That seems an unfair characterisation - as steps have been taken towards developing the movement - and even if it wasn't, fundamentally, drawing attention to the disproportionate number of black people incarcerated, subject to injury or death due to institutionalised racism, is an important action in itself.
That said, there are openings to go beyond that and develop the movement much further. And they should be seizing those opportunities.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
The Black Lives Matter organization I am a part of is quite disorganized. I never see any large, actual protests for state legislature or policy change despite being in a red state, and the election coming up soon. We could definitely use some work, but there's also benefits to having a leaderless organization given that our past leaders were assassinated.
Could BLM do better? Yes. Is the cause impractical or without merit because we could do better? No.
Could BLM do better? Yes. Is the cause impractical or without merit because we could do better? No.
User 463088
Banned
Hillary has refused to accept any money from PACs, lobbyists or bundlers associated with private prisons. Any funds she has received from them will be donated to charity. In fact, there are a few news articles that show she Tweeted about private prisons, and their stocks fell in value by $100-200 million (depending on the company).
I do not agree with Clinton on the death penalty. However, unless you're willing to call anyone who supports it anti-black, I think that's too broad a brush. She has said that there are issues in which the states currently utilize it, and she would like to see changes made.
benjipwns
Banned
How do you know I don't work for the DoJ? Or FBI? Or Cato: http://www.policemisconduct.net/maps/searchable-map-2009-2010-misconduct-incidents/
http://www.cato.org/raidmap
Look, as Hillary said, you can't end the drug war because there's too much money in it.
benjipwns
Banned
What about police and prison guard unions?
EDIT: This makes me laugh for some reason:
That's almost twice what the Directors Guild has given her, and the Teamsters
That's an odd union.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I don't think anyone who supports the death penalty as anti-black. For me, it's a combination of drug war, private prisons, and death penalty which I find to form the trifecta of anti-black policies dating to the 70's. You get arrested for a non-violent drug offense, you go to prison, you can no longer vote - which means a repressed voice and one less vote on the streets, you struggle to find a job due to your conviction, which leads to being forced to do illegal jobs for mere sustenance. The cycle repeats.
If Hilary supports all three of them, I find it pretty dead pressed to not call her anti-black. Even if it's not framed that way, the ultimate conclusion is indirect (and direct) anti-black policy making.
As for the death penalty, an overwhelmingly majority of people on death row are Black and Latino, often for crimes they didn't commit. There is a clear bias in terms of race in regards to the death penalty. It's very much tied to race and de-humanization as well, which is the core of why BLM is so important.
To act like these issues are merely separate would be illogical as much as it is insulting.
vainglorious
Member
That is the exact fucking opposite of what she said. Her policies are NOT anti-black.
Really great article from the New York Times from that exchange - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/20/u...akes-on-civil-rights-generation-gap.html?_r=0
And to those criticizing Clinton for not adequately addressing racial justice issues during her current campaign - you have not been paying attention.
States where millions of Super Pac money are deciding local elections, great idea I'm sure the people elected will make great strides in the changes.
That's the kind of bullshit dismissal OWS got, but guess what, income inequality and police brutality against minorities are now top political issues that candidates can't ignore.
Not everyone has to be a strategist. The people who are just mad as fuck and in the streets are critically important. It's not like there aren't already plenty of people writing all kinds of thinkpieces on strategy already. It's useless without the actual pressure.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I don't give a damn what Hilary said.
Show me what she does, who gives her money.
Where there's smoke, there's a fire. Especially when your former President husband's crime laws helped create the situation in the first place.
Hilary is anti-black.
Show me what she does, who gives her money.
Where there's smoke, there's a fire. Especially when your former President husband's crime laws helped create the situation in the first place.
Hilary is anti-black.
vainglorious
Member
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Epsilon-delta
Banned
So much truth. They want the vote but like MLK eloquently stated in his latter, the time is never right for black issues and one must continue playing the game of wait and see.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
To be fair to you, I didn't see the Clinton statement on for profit prisons until today. It definitely gives me more hope to the point where I might consider voting for her if Bernie doesn't get the nom. So you did good changing my view.
I'm not saying the methods are the same. Just that people definitely say around and talked about how "rude" or counterproductive the protests were. And yes, they were disruptive. That was the reason they worked. I'm saying that abrasive tactics have been used by civil rights movements in the past. And we need to view this movement in the same light. A light of extreme urgency.
"income inequality" is a synonym for socialism, communism, and Hitler to one of the two parties, a party that recently won back control of the Senate, widened their lead in the House, and has dominated state gubernatorial races and legislatures. It's a top issue for two candidates in one party and one of them is a self-described democratic socialist and is planning to give a speech to explain to people what that exactly means. I'm not going to blame OWS for this but i'm not exactly worried about dismissing them.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
The slope in Canada and most of Europe is the same: high crime in the 70s/80s/early 90s and a huge dropoff afterwards. The difference is we didn't have to have higher incarceration rates than North Korea to pull that off.
Looks like progress to me.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Looks like progress to me.
Your logic is backwards, certainly?
Crime fell, but Black people are being imprisoned at an insane rate. Unless your hypothesis is that we are inherently more predisposed to do crime than any other race (we aren't).
If crime has fallen, and Black prison populations is over 1 million, certainly this means the opposite of progress and certainly hints at highly systemic inequality moreso than even in 1950's and 60's?
Epsilon-delta
Banned
You're proving his point. Crime has fallen, while prison population has exploded, which can be attributed to high incarceration rates amongst blacks.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll