What can we, as individual US citizens do to improve the division (non-political)

[Guest]

I think that one of the best things we all can do is to not put aims and motives into other people's mouths. BLM protests are a prime example. So are the anti-masks/restrictions protests. I know people who participated in each side, and in all cases, their concerns are ones that, individually, I can see as valid, but the media coverage tended to be on the extreme ends. So, protesters who really wanted "Please don't kill my husband or son in a minor traffic stop, and we really want police officers who understand the community and neighborhood and are part of it, not those who see us as a problem to be managed" were painted as Marxist, anti-cop supremicists, and folks who really wanted to be able to open their stores again and go back to work, and no, they didn't want COVID, just to earn a living, were painted as being totally irrational COVID deniers. 

 

The same is true with pretty much any other division. Most folks are reasonable, rational people who have reasons for doing what they do and supporting what they do. To use my example from earlier in the thread, most folks who are anti-abortion don't think about a D&C to complete a miscarriage or having to deliver a fetus before it is viable to save a mother's life as being abortion, so they don't realize that the laws they are championing often inadvertently restrict this as well. And a lot of people think maternal deaths related to pregnancy as something that happens somewhere else, not realizing that some parts of the US have statistics that are equal to third world countries. Similarly, I really would prefer NO abortions occur in healthy pregnancies, and that all children be born into homes that want them and are able to care for them. We actually have a lot more common ground than not. 

 

Add past trauma to that, and it gets even harder. If you have been pulled out of your car, forced to kneel  on the pavement, and handcuffed in a simple traffic stop, fearing every second that you might get shot, it's going to be a lot harder to talk rationally about the problems in modern policing. I know the concept of triggers and trigger warnings have been overblown to "I don't want to hear about anything that makes me uncomfortable", but the thing is, there are a lot of people who have had experiences which DO trigger emotional reactions that make it hard to react rationally. It may not meet the definition of PTSD, but it's still a detriment to discourse-and is something that, if someone reacts pretty strongly, needs to be kept in mind.  And if someone tells you that this topic isn't something they are comfortable discussing at this time in this setting, I think that needs to be accepted, no matter how silly it seems. Because we don't know what someone else's history is, or WHY it is uncomfortable. 

 

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, dmmetler said:

I think that one of the best things we all can do is to not put aims and motives into other people's mouths. BLM protests are a prime example. So are the anti-masks/restrictions protests. I know people who participated in each side, and in all cases, their concerns are ones that, individually, I can see as valid, but the media coverage tended to be on the extreme ends. So, protesters who really wanted "Please don't kill my husband or son in a minor traffic stop, and we really want police officers who understand the community and neighborhood and are part of it, not those who see us as a problem to be managed" were painted as Marxist, anti-cop supremicists, and folks who really wanted to be able to open their stores again and go back to work, and no, they didn't want COVID, just to earn a living, were painted as being totally irrational COVID deniers. 

That’s an interesting comparison. The problem is that while I sympathize with people wanting to get back to work, it was never clear how to do it safely and still isn’t.

[Guest]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

That’s an interesting comparison. The problem is that while I sympathize with people wanting to get back to work, it was never clear how to do it safely and still isn’t.

I don't know that it is. But I do think hearing what people are really concerned about, vs the most extreme cases, is important. No matter what the issue is. I suspect most issues approximate a normal distribution. It's just that those tails of the graph tend to be extremely vocal-and, in current climate, often influential as well. 

 

[HeartString]

44 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

The obvious downside of that, leaving aside the abortion issue which has absolutely nothing to do with a movement that is fundamentally about valuing life, is that solutions to disparate policing SHOULD be locally developed/derived. Different communities have different challenges. I’m not sure why the onus should be on members of the movement to disprove a negative like “When did you last beat your wife?”

I don’t disagree with you.  I just think that at some point you need a national spokesperson and some sort of control of messaging.  Because the BLM message isn’t getting out properly by just relying on media and local spokespeople.  I’m 100% sure that some of that is willful ignorance on the part of people who want to dislike BLM, but part of it is that by choosing not to have a national voice they are letting the media do their messaging for them.  And the media loves chaos and extremism, so BLM is being painted as extreme.  Leaving it up to local people to fight against that isn’t going to work.  Fighting the fight locally is great, but once it makes national news on a regular basis you need communication on a national scale. Even if that persons main job is to refer to local efforts.  
 

 

As to the abortion thing, I’m just repeating what I’ve heard as a reason people give for not trusting or liking BLM.  I’m sure it’s used by people who want cover to dislike BLM.  But on this thread being a one issue voter has been discussed.  Those same people are not going to “hear” anything about BLM because they are able to use “but babies” as their rebuttal and that closes the conversation. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Cnew02

[Sneezyone]

13 minutes ago, Cnew02 said:

I don’t disagree with you.  I just think that at some point you need a national spokesperson and some sort of control of messaging.  Because the BLM message isn’t getting out properly by just relying on media and local spokespeople.  I’m 100% sure that some of that is willful ignorance on the part of people who want to dislike BLM, but part of it is that by choosing not to have a national voice they are letting the media do their messaging for them.  And the media loves chaos and extremism, so BLM is being painted as extreme.  Leaving it up to local people to fight against that isn’t going to work.  Fighting the fight locally is great, but once it makes national news on a regular basis you need communication on a national scale. Even if that persons main job is to refer to local efforts.  

The message isn’t getting out due to no fault of the movement. Seriously. Local leaders like Cori Bush (newly elected member of Congress from MO) are out there and available for national interviews. There’s nothing to be done about the deliberate misinformation being shared. Focusing on that, in fact, detracts and distracts from where activists can and do make a difference, locally. Local organizing has worked. Local organizing has led to more representation for affected communities in state/local/federal governance. It’s led to multiple ousted sherriffs and prosecutors. I know that people are by and large blind to those changes b/c they’re not big and sexy, but they represent meaningful change for affected communities. Besides, even big/sexy things like the MOW2020 don’t get significant coverage. So, ultimately, I think it’s up to individuals to do their due diligence. Willful ignorance can’t be the movement’s burden to bear. It’s a waste of time/energy.

 

ETA: to be totally honest too, these kinds of requests for a national figurehead feel like a trap. National movement leaders are typically targeted for assassination. Decentralized, grassroots movements are harder to disrupt. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[MercyA]

Jumping in here after just skimming the previous posts, so please cut me some slack. I'll go back and read more carefully later. Just trying to add some info about people who say they are not racist but don't support BLM, because I have a feeling that describes many of the people in my circles. 

My best friend once said something like, "I believe black lives matter. But I could not as a Christian wear a Black Lives Matter t-shirt, because I'm afraid that people would misunderstand. I do not agree with what the national organization stands for."

When I pressed her on that, she said that an organization / person (unnamed) she trusts said that BLM is a "hate group." I told her I had never heard that and she admitted that she hadn't looked into it herself, but trusted her source. 

Another acquaintance told me that people "don't know what Black Lives Matter actually stands for." (I didn't get a chance to ask her what she meant, because a friend with five black and brown children entered the convo and I left.)

I am guessing many conservatives have a problem with the statement on the BLM website stating that they "affirm the lives" of queer people, trans people, and people all along the gender spectrum. 

Other acquaintances equate BLM with rioting. Not fair, not right, just saying that is another reason some would say they are not racist, but don't support BLM.  

I support the movement as a whole and would be happy to attend BLM protests and wear a BLM t-shirt. I might be willing to donate to a local chapter, depending on their position statements. 

Thank you, @Sneezyone, for sharing your knowledge and experience of the movement. I am not in any way trying to negate anything you said about that. I'm trying to clarify for those who have questions about why anyone would choose not to support the movement.

Edited November 10, 2020 by MercyA

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Jumping in here after just skimming the previous posts, so please cut me some slack. I'll go back and read more carefully later. Just trying to add some info about people who say they are not racist but don't support BLM, because I have a feeling that describes many of the people in my circles. 

My best friend once said something like, "I believe black lives matter. But I could not as a Christian wear a Black Lives Matter t-shirt, because I'm afraid that people would misunderstand. I do not agree with what the national organization stands for."

When I pressed her on that, she said that an organization / person (unnamed) she trusts said that BLM is a "hate group." I told her I had never heard that and she admitted that she hadn't looked into it herself, but trusted her source. 

Another acquaintance told me that people "don't know what Black Lives Matter actually stands for." (I didn't get a chance to ask her what she meant, because a friend with five black and brown children entered the convo and I left.)

Many conservatives have a problem with the statement on the BLM website stating that they "affirm the lives" of queer people, trans people, and people all along the gender spectrum. 

Other acquaintances equate BLM with rioting. Not fair, not right, just saying that is another reason some would say they are not racist, but don't support BLM.  

I personally would be willing to attend BLM protests and wear a BLM t-shirt. I might be willing to donate to a local chapter, depending on their position statements. 

Thank you, @Sneezyone, for sharing your knowledge and experience of the movement. I am not in any way trying to negate anything you said about that. I'm trying to clarify for those who have questions about why anyone would choose not to support the movement.

Thanks. I’ve seen/heard all of that. I’m merely pointing out that most of it is unfounded hearsay and a few mouse clicks might take people to local organizations and activities and clear up any misperceptions. 

[Danae]

28 minutes ago, Cnew02 said:

I don’t disagree with you.  I just think that at some point you need a national spokesperson and some sort of control of messaging.  Because the BLM message isn’t getting out properly by just relying on media and local spokespeople.  I’m 100% sure that some of that is willful ignorance on the part of people who want to dislike BLM, but part of it is that by choosing not to have a national voice they are letting the media do their messaging for them.  And the media loves chaos and extremism, so BLM is being painted as extreme.  Leaving it up to local people to fight against that isn’t going to work.  Fighting the fight locally is great, but once it makes national news on a regular basis you need communication on a national scale. Even if that persons main job is to refer to local efforts.  
 

 

 

It would indeed be convenient to have a single spokesperson or organizational structure that could give give a precise answer when people have questions about what Black Lives Matter believes about <insert question here>.  It would be nice to have such a thing for Christianity too, so that when someone asks “What do real Christians really believe about <insert question here> there would be a place to go for a definitive answer. But it’s not possible, because Christianity isn’t a single organization, and neither is Black Lives Matter.  The idea that there’s some hidden organization behind the whole thing with secret goals beyond affirming that black people’s lives are as valuable as every other human life is a baseless conspiracy theory.

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

What is this organization that you speak of? For real, why/how do you know what it is but the people who actually attend the events, and the churches who participate in them, do not?

It is an actually organization and before they took it down a few months ago, one of their many objectives having nothing do with improving lives of black people, was stop encouraging marriage and then children.  Other items I object to are also aims of that particular organization.  It is a legal IRS listed organization and one that I do not approve of. Organizations I would have no objection to anyone telling me they support are ones like NAACP, etc.  Black Lives Matter is a very far left, socialist organization and so no, if my Pastor was all in to that, I would have an issues.  

[Pam in CT]

The Black Lives Matter Foundation is a shell corporation that is under investigation by multiple states' AGs for collecting donations and... well, what happened to collected funds is under investigation.  Here is the NY AG's order that they cease accepting any contributions from NY based donors. There are other similar orders and related investigations under way in CA and other states.  It is alleged to be a small handful of individuals taking advantage of the goodwill of well meaning donors. It is *definitely* not establishing organizational "principles" beyond their own selves.

 

The BLM movement is a movement, decentralized grass roots folks coming together around a shared statement of values.

Much like the "pro-life" movement.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Pam in CT
omitted word

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Mommalongadingdong said:

 

 

 Why though? Honestly. 

I mean, if people, even people of your congregation,  came and said they support BLM and share why you should too.... Is that too much? 

Is pointing out that there's racism still too much? 

Like, I'm so confused where the disconnect is? Is it that you think BLM is some organized group causing all the world's problems? Like as a Christian, how can I not welcome ANYONE to my church, especially those advocating equality and peace? 

I am absolutely sure that there is probably at least one person in my church that supports the BLM organization and she sure does want to lay into you and harangue you into supporting all her leftist causes.  My dd sits on a committee with her.  Most have quit because of her never-ending long speeches of why she is right and everyone should have the same mission ends as her.  The few remaining members ignore her and go on with our mission activities which a good deal are centered on a few disadvantaged, minority area neighborhoods in our city.

Pointing out any racism that may be occuring is not too much.  BLM is not the way to do it.  And I am by far not the most conservative person in my church.  BUt my church has everyone from far left to quite conservative and that is okay.  A Pastor deciding to support BLM versus a local group working towards racial reconcilliation would be something I would not support.  I want my Pastor focusing on the Bible-  and yes, how we relate to others can be informed by that, but advocating socialism is not in the Bible.

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I actually don't believe that what we're doing now is making Israel safer, let me tell you. (And as someone whose dad lives in Israel, along with his family, I do care about that.) 

Why would everyone lose their job and be unable to get another one? I'm confused. 

We are all working in the defense/space world.  

And I can't believe that holding Iran at bay and forging three new peace treaties between Israel and Arab and African neighbors isn't helping peace.

[Valley Girl]

9 hours ago, Carol in Cal. said:

A foundation is usually a charity, a fundraising arm of some area or cause.

Maybe what some are looking for is this:

https://blacklivesmatter.com/

I'm quite sure I'll regret weighing in, but here goes. This website is the one I found when I was trying to find information on the movement. So I'm sure many people saw it. At the time, it included text that said the movement wanted to "disrupt" the nuclear family. The larger context, if I recall correctly, seemed to be that it wanted to expand what is thought of as family. However, I found the choice of the word disrupt--rather than enhance, expand, grow--quite jarring as the connotation was extremely negative to me. It felt...threatening... and was something that really stood out to me. (The reference has since been removed from the website.) That line was also later used by politicians as a "see..." example. My point is, when people see statements about a movement's goals put out by the movement, or those who purport (rightly or wrongly) to be behind it, they're going to assume there are structure and organization and tenets to the movement.

So I think that's why people talk about the organization. And why they may support the concept of black lives deeply mattering, want better policing, etc., but say they don't support BLM (capital letters=organization).

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

We are all working in the defense/space world.  

And I can't believe that holding Iran at bay and forging three new peace treaties between Israel and Arab and African neighbors isn't helping peace.

Yeah, I was thinking of Israel's internal dynamics, not the peace treaties. The peace treaties might very well help. 

[Sneezyone]

7 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

We are all working in the defense/space world.  

And I can't believe that holding Iran at bay and forging three new peace treaties between Israel and Arab and African neighbors isn't helping peace.

Yeah, I also know someone working in nuclear treaties right now, AD, and our agencies are desperately trying to hold on to good people until a handover. Sorry, that may be political, but these people just want to do what’s right for the nation. No ones been yearning for DC assignments.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Joker]

I follow 3 different BLM groups for my area and all 3 do different things. One I mostly help out with donating money or food to their food pantry because their biggest need is feeding people in that community. One I donate money to help locals pay rent and bills. One is great for organizing times and places for protests. I’ve never thought of BLM as one cohesive organization because it’s just not what I’ve seen personally.

[Not_a_Number]

I don’t think that a movement like BLM could possibly exist without being demonized. It just can’t happen in our political climate. I don’t think any form of protest can, frankly, except maybe silently “protesting” at home. 

[Sneezyone]

4 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don’t think that a movement like BLM could possibly exist without being demonized. It just can’t happen in our political climate. I don’t think any form of protest can, frankly, except maybe silently “protesting” at home. 

THIS. Silent kneeling, fists raised, t-shirts—none of it is ok because the fundamental message that Black Lives Matter is, and always has been, a radical idea in America.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

THIS. Silent kneeling, fists raised, t-shirts—none of it is ok because the fundamental message that Black Lives Matter is, and always has been, a radical idea in America.

I’ve watched the Obama presidency. And I’ve watched the variety of protests. It can’t be done. 

(I didn’t realize this 10 years ago. It was a really unpleasant revelation.)

[TravelingChris]

15 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

Honestly, I don’t even know what that would look like. BLM is literally a declaration that my life and those of my husband, children and family members matter. I spent the day with more than 10k people in DC listening to speakers talk about how to advance the safety and protection of black, brown, Asian, LGBTQIA people. There was no violence. So, yeah, this whole question confuses me. Either we matter, or we don’t. I’m not sure why that’s controversial. 
 

I guess I should add, what does BLM mean to you?

A specific organization that I do not agree with regards a number of things- namely socialist economic policies, advocating anything goes with family structure (I mean I know it does but I think sociology and economics shows that anything goes with family structure is actually quite destructive), defunding police, etc.

I was for all sorts of police reforms way before BLM ever came into being,  Because bad policing and bad cJ is just bad overall for our country.  I don't know what you expect me to say- first of all, I find almost all protests to be dumb--not that people can't be allowed to do dumb stuff- but pointless.  Most, not all.  I am still very much an advocate for a number of police reforms and cj reforms.  Criminial Justice and criminology was what I got my masters in and what I did for my doctorate  As I already said, I do not have the same issues with a number of historic black organizations nor do I have issues with a lot of the concerns that people have who are attending BLM events, etc.  But I think BLM is a scam organization with sketch motives.  

And as to racism, unfortunately, that is one thing I am accosted with much more regularly now.  Like one city about 45 miles away from me doubled down on the confederate symbols debate and just erected a big fence around the flag and some plaque.  I think this may be the same city that had a blacks not welcome sign posted before their city up until around 2000.  I think that many there and here and in a lot of areas grew up in segregated areas, schools, etc and think that is the way to go.  Not me nor my family.  I know I feel much more comfortable in multi-ethnic and racial areas and groups.   But I think that is because I grew up not thinking of myself in terms of color but in terms of being an outsider since that is what so many considered me=== so in particular, I get incredibly incensed when anyone mentions "white privilege" because I didn't have that nor did our family.

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

THIS. Silent kneeling, fists raised, t-shirts—none of it is ok because the fundamental message that Black Lives Matter is, and always has been, a radical idea in America.

ETA: this is why I cannot befriend people who see this as a political matter and not a human rights, life/death one. Which is, honestly, why my military spouse circle is small and tight. It’s a fundamental difference in values, Christian and otherwise, that can’t be overlooked.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

4 hours ago, Quill said:

That's where you need skillz. And it's difficult when they have been "programmed" to think the source that gives them their info is the only one telling the truth. 

Sometimes you can pull the fateful Jenga rod, though, just by asking questions to have them reveal to themselves that they don't actually know what they profess to know. Questions like, "How does that work?" "What are the contributing factors to that?" "What do you think is a better idea?" Etc. 

I did say, "Sometimes," though. Other times, a person just gets angry and the conversation must end. 

Or both sides could admit that neither one of them knows enough to be sure of the facts.

[TravelingChris]

11 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

What organization? BLM is a movement, not an organization. 

It is an organization with that capitalization.  Otherwise how can Starbucks, etc be funding a movement.

[*Jessica*]

3 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

But I think that is because I grew up not thinking of myself in terms of color but in terms of being an outsider since that is what so many considered me=== so in particular, I get incredibly incensed when anyone mentions "white privilege" because I didn't have that nor did our family.

No matter what you think, if you are white you do benefit from white privilege.  

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

But I think that is because I grew up not thinking of myself in terms of color but in terms of being an outsider since that is what so many considered me=== so in particular, I get incredibly incensed when anyone mentions "white privilege" because I didn't have that nor did our family.

Actually, you do have it, but it’s not an indictment, merely the fact that society does treat you differently than a Black person, and yes, that includes a literate, rich Black person. (And I’m an immigrant, so I do know how those get treated.)

I’ve seen people use this idea as a bludgeon, just like a lot of social justice phrases. They express a real idea but they get coopted. It’s worth it to try examine the idea and ignore the shrill people, though.

[Sneezyone]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

It is an organization with that capitalization.  Otherwise how can Starbucks, etc be funding a movement.

Starbucks is a corporation with bylaws and regulations for all of its affiliates and franchises. Not the same, at all.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

Or both sides could admit that neither one of them knows enough to be sure of the facts.

So... how is this going to work? It’s opinion all the way down, after the turtles run out?

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

Or both sides could admit that neither one of them knows enough to be sure of the facts.

Right. There is no truth. I give up.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

The "I don't approve of BLM" thing is a bit bizarre. It's a bit like saying "I am OK with Christianity, but I don't like churches. Any churches. Big churches, small churches, none of them are fine. Yeah, I know they are all different, and I already said I'm OK with Christianity, which is what they do there, but churches? Nope, no thanks." 

People do say that!  Not everyone who is Christian likes how churches operate, not even close.

Or as Mahatma Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

Right. There is no truth. I give up.

Yeah, I have to say, if a leftist professor said this, it would be considered radical relativism.

[TravelingChris]

11 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

There is no *actual* organization to believe/not believe in. BLM is a movement of people like me who stand for and advocate for racial justice and fairness in policing. I suppose there are people who do not believe in those things but, to your earlier question, no, we could not be close friends.

It is an organization.  That is why companies can donate money to it.  https://blacklivesmatter.com/

They are taking donations.  They make money off of merchandise.  And I do not support them but do support changing the CJ system to help blacks, mentally ill, anyone,.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, SKL said:

People do say that!  Not everyone who is Christian likes how churches operate, not even close.

Or as Mahatma Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

Ok, I believe people say that, but I’d guess that would offend a lot of people.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

It is an organization.  That is why companies can donate money to it.  https://blacklivesmatter.com/

They are taking donations.  They make money off of merchandise.  And I do not support them but do support changing the CJ system to help blacks, mentally ill, anyone,.

But the point is that there is no centralized structure. No one runs it.

[TravelingChris]

11 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

Just to clarify, saying, I don’t like that BLM organization is like saying I don’t like that civil rights movement organization. Well which one? NAN, ADL, ACLU, NAACP, NUL, La Rasa, Voto Latino? They all organize separately and together, have distinct platforms and issues, and all fall under the civil rights movement umbrella. There is no BLM organization. I’m beginning to feel like the inability to identify either an organization or problematic platform is very telling. Where does this information or misinformation come from?

I  am more in line with some of these groups than others.  I am not familiar with all of them.  BUt I linked above the web page of the BLM group.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

I  am more in line with some of these groups than others.  I am not familiar with all of them.  BUt I linked above the web page of the BLM group.

It’s not the group. It’s the women who started the hashtag. They are more radical than most people protesting.

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

But the question is what that could mean. What about "I am not racist, but I think we should segregate the schools again." Is that a meaningful sentence? What does it MEAN? 

What kind of inflammatory rhetoric are you spouting??????    I am not in favor of BLM organization.  I am not in favor of defunding police.  I am in favor of police reform.  I am not in favor of segregating schools although the only attempts at desegregating schools and other things I have seen is by very select minority groups- i.e. Black Muslim groups,  and similar sorts.  

I haven't heard anyone hear spouting racist stuff and your post is completely out of line.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

What kind of inflammatory rhetoric are you spouting??????    I am not in favor of BLM organization.  I am not in favor of defunding police.  I am in favor of police reform.  I am not in favor of segregating schools although the only attempts at desegregating schools and other things I have seen is by very select minority groups- i.e. Black Muslim groups,  and similar sorts.  

I haven't heard anyone hear spouting racist stuff and your post is completely out of line.

I think “defund the police” was extremely bad messaging, but again, there’s no central organization, and therefore this nonexistent organization is not advocating for it. 

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

To be explicit here, not supporting BLM can be used as evidence of racism. It might not be intentional racism, it might not be conscious racism, but it's racism nonetheless. Especially given that there IS no global movement, just a bunch of people waving signs and saying that Black Lives Matter.

NO it isn't.  Again very inflammatory attacks,.

[SKL]

2 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

The obvious downside of that, leaving aside the abortion issue which has absolutely nothing to do with a movement that is fundamentally about valuing life, is that solutions to disparate policing SHOULD be locally developed/derived. Different communities have different challenges. I’m not sure why the onus should be on members of the movement to disprove a negative like “When did you last beat your wife?”

I agree with local solutions targeted to local problems.  Which is why I have a problem with, for example, out-of-town agitators coming in and trying to incite people to go beyond what should have been an effective protest.  I have seen this happen in person.  Thankfully, in my personal example, the local individuals would have none of it; but in some locations, as we've seen, the outsiders have successfully derailed the good local intentions.

Another thing is, some of the leadership that claim or appear to speak for "BLM" are ideologically aligned with communism, similar to the black power movement in the 1960s.  So that is another reason why a lot of people would rather not see a lot of donation money going for that cause.

I didn't know people were attaching a pro-abortion stand to BLM.  It is somewhat ironic that the most vocal BLM supporters are also pro-abortion, but that is not something I officially connect with BLM (but I could be wrong about that).  Considering that the roots of the so-called pro-choice movement began with a blatant anti-black-lives ideology, I would think that would be an issue for many black people, but who am I to say?

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

NO it isn't.  Again very inflammatory attacks,.

But you can see what it actually means to a not particularly radical Black person, right? You can see how this would bother someone?

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I agree with local solutions targeted to local problems.  Which is why I have a problem with, for example, out-of-town agitators coming in and trying to incite people to go beyond what should have been an effective protest.  I have seen this happen in person.  Thankfully, in my personal example, the local individuals would have none of it; but in some locations, as we've seen, the outsiders have successfully derailed the good local intentions.

Another thing is, some of the leadership that claim or appear to speak for "BLM" are ideologically aligned with communism, similar to the black power movement in the 1960s.  So that is another reason why a lot of people would rather not see a lot of donation money going for that cause.

I didn't know people were attaching a pro-abortion stand to BLM.  It is somewhat ironic that the most vocal BLM supporters are also pro-abortion, but that is not something I officially connect with BLM (but I could be wrong about that).  Considering that the roots of the so-called pro-choice movement began with a blatant anti-black-lives ideology, I would think that would be an issue for many black people, but who am I to say?

Indeed.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I agree with local solutions targeted to local problems.  Which is why I have a problem with, for example, out-of-town agitators coming in and trying to incite people to go beyond what should have been an effective protest.  I have seen this happen in person.  Thankfully, in my personal example, the local individuals would have none of it; but in some locations, as we've seen, the outsiders have successfully derailed the good local intentions.

Local solutions to local problems is an excellent way to go if everyone is well-meaning. 

[Not_a_Number]

Look, if you don’t like BLM, think about what would be more productive. If you don’t like protests, perhaps simply not voting in people that seem racists? How do implement police reform? What needs to be done? If you’re only interested in local problems, is there anything you’re working to have done locally?

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

 

Wel

 

10 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

OK, so far no one has said they disapprove of BLM except @TravelingChris, is that right? So do most of us here approve of the movement? 

I'm just trying to figure out what people think here. If I've misinterpreted anyone's stance, I'm really sorry. 

I said  I do  not approve of the organization, not that I do not think that black lives matter.  Of course, black lives matter.  ANd for some reason, you seem to be continually implying I am a racist, I am voting in ways to harm you  ( I have no idea how since I am in a state far away from you), that I am trying to offend Sneezyone  (btw- I am not thinking that anyone attending BLM protests, etc is all with all of the aims of the group or groups--- I was specifically originally commenting that I would not like my pastor to be promoting this group--- not racial healing-that is appropriate- but that specific group) It wasn't about banning people from church, segregating schools, hating on anyone, or anything like that.

[Not_a_Number]

This conversation is getting hard to watch for me 😕 . I’m not a fan of the “stay in your lane” messaging, but there’s so little listening going on here.

[Sdel]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

This conversation is getting hard to watch for me 😕 . I’m not a fan of the “stay in your lane” messaging, but there’s so little listening going on here.

QFT

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

Wel

 

I said  I do  not approve of the organization, not that I do not think that black lives matter.  Of course, black lives matter.  ANd for some reason, you seem to be continually implying I am a racist, I am voting in ways to harm you  ( I have no idea how since I am in a state far away from you), that I am trying to offend Sneezyone  (btw- I am not thinking that anyone attending BLM protests, etc is all with all of the aims of the group or groups--- I was specifically originally commenting that I would not like my pastor to be promoting this group--- not racial healing-that is appropriate- but that specific group) It wasn't about banning people from church, segregating schools, hating on anyone, or anything like that.

I don’t think you’re a racist in the sense that you mean in any way. As for whether your vote could have directly harmed me... given that I don’t have my citizenship yet, and one of the parties isn’t real eager to give out citizenships, it’s possible.

But more globally, it’s hard to explain what I mean here without being inflammatory. Mostly, I’ve been finding the state of our world oppressive.

[TravelingChris]

10 hours ago, kand said:

I think there are probably a lot of people who missed these stories in the news because the identities often weren’t determined until weeks or months afterwards. For example, the masked man in Minneapolis charged with inciting the riots and looting there in the wake of George Floyd’s death was a white supremacist: https://abcnews.go.com/US/man-helped-ignite-george-floyd-riots-identified-white/story?id=72051536

And the people who were charged with attempting to kidnap and murder Gov Whitmire were not Trump supporters at all nor Republicans.  They were part of the Sovereign Citizen group and hated Trump and basically all politicians/govt officials.

[SKL]

24 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

So... how is this going to work? It’s opinion all the way down, after the turtles run out?

When people ask me "what do you think of xyz" I am very likely to say "I don't know enough about it" and decline to opine.  I say this much more than "my opinion is ___." 

There is no requirement that every human have an opinion about every issue.  It would be better not to have an opinion where factual knowledge is low.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

And the people who were charged with attempting to kidnap and murder Gov Whitmire were not Trump supporters at all nor Republicans.  They were part of the Sovereign Citizen group and hated Trump and basically all politicians/govt officials.

Could you cite the “Trump hatred” please?