Jump to content

Menu

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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 544
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think we need move civic involvement. The more people work together to improve their community the more we will be unified as a country regardless of political affiliation. Joining League of Women V

I think that part of the problem is that people who are on extreme ends of the red/blue spectrum think that *everyone* is on an extreme end.  They think that everyone is a radical.   I really thi

My current (albeit imperfect) attempts: Listen to people. Really listen. Not to better argue my own point but simply to understand.   Avoid (and recognize and call out) dehumanizing and d

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

If you can find the policies of this ‘organization’ that you find objectionable, I’d love to see it.

I believe black lives matter, police justice needs improvement, and peaceful protests to that end are appropriate.  I have, however, seen people misuse the words to achieve ends that don't appear to have much to do with the value of black lives.  This is not of course an issue only with BLM.  But it does hurt the underlying intention IMO.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SKL said:

I believe black lives matter, police justice needs improvement, and peaceful protests to that end are appropriate.  I have, however, seen people misuse the words to achieve ends that don't appear to have much to do with the value of black lives.  This is not of course an issue only with BLM.  But it does hurt the underlying intention IMO.

It only hurts the underlying intention if one presumes or chooses to believe that the fringes of any movement represent the whole. It’s also important to recognize that there is a concerted and deliberate effort to infiltrate and undermine the movement that’s been acknowledged by state and local officials in several states. What are these sketchy ends you’ve seen promoted?

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, I think people should be skeptical of names and slogans.  Very often they do not accurately represent the underlying agenda / activities.  I am sure you all can think of examples if you try.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

It only hurts the underlying intention if one presumes or chooses to believe that the fringes of any movement represent the whole. It’s also important to recognize that there is a concerted and deliberate effort to infiltrate and undermine the movement that’s been acknowledged by state and local officials in several states.

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

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SKL said:

And yes, I think people should be skeptical of names and slogans.  Very often they do not accurately represent the underlying agenda / activities.  I am sure you all can think of examples if you try.

I’m sure I could think of some. “Defund the police”, for example, is silly and not at all sufficiently descriptive. It’s proponents typically mean reallocating resources not zeroing out police budgets. It’s also something I generally hear from WASPS too not the people who actually need/want more FAIR/PROPORTIONATE policing in their communities, but I’m specifically wondering what makes BLM something to be skeptical about? 

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

And what do you do when people can't agree on what facts are? How do you check? 

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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know where it comes from exactly, but I see people comment all the time on Facebook that “BLM isn’t what it seems”.  When pressed the only answer I’ve ever seen is that they support abortion. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but saying that it is gives large swaths if the population cover for not supporting it. 
 

I think it might be easier if someone did take the lead with BLM and set up an organization with a structure.  I’m sure there are reasons why it doesn’t, but seems like so much energy goes into explaining the whole “not an organization, it’s a movement”.  I feel like Occupy tried this set up and wasn’t as effective as it might have been, and I think BLM might be suffering the same fate.  Conversations like this one make me wonder if whatever the benefits of not having a structure are out weighing the negatives. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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. 

I mean, I do that. But when it’s not people close to you, they just get mad 😉 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 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." 

yes!!!

 

7 hours ago, SKL said:

I believe black lives matter, police justice needs improvement, and peaceful protests to that end are appropriate.  I have, however, seen people misuse the words to achieve ends that don't appear to have much to do with the value of black lives.  This is not of course an issue only with BLM.  But it does hurt the underlying intention IMO.

Ok, as said above, I'm a Christian, and agree with the basic tenets of Christianity. Like you agree with the basic tenet that Black Lives Matter. But I've seen people misuse the Bible, and their faith, to achieve ends that have nothing to do with the sacrificial death of Christ. That doesn't mean I don't support Christianity, or that it would make any sense really, for me to say I don't support Christianity. 

Which is why I don't get why there is this need for perfection amongst all who claim Black Lives Matter in order for people to support it. I'd say the majority of people that say they can't support the movement due to XYZ have no problem supporting Christianity despite there being Christians who also do XYZ. 

And there are websites for Christianity, and you can donate to various Christian groups but there is no overarching "Christian" organization that is in charge of all the others. 

Edited by ktgrok
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cnew02 said:

I don’t know where it comes from exactly, but I see people comment all the time on Facebook that “BLM isn’t what it seems”.  When pressed the only answer I’ve ever seen is that they support abortion. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but saying that it is gives large swaths if the population cover for not supporting it. 
 

I think it might be easier if someone did take the lead with BLM and set up an organization with a structure.  I’m sure there are reasons why it doesn’t, but seems like so much energy goes into explaining the whole “not an organization, it’s a movement”.  I feel like Occupy tried this set up and wasn’t as effective as it might have been, and I think BLM might be suffering the same fate.  Conversations like this one make me wonder if whatever the benefits of not having a structure are out weighing the negatives. 

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?”

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Cnew02
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Sneezyone
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by MercyA
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

  • Confused 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Pam in CT
omitted word
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Sneezyone
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 6
  • Sad 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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,.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...