Jump to content

"Love One Another" v. "Black Lives Matter"


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, CV75 said:

As with "racism" the term "white supremacy" carries broader or narrower meanings in different circles. To some it means intentional hate and to others it means policy (formal and informal, conscious and unconscious) where whites enjoy the advantage of holding power and resources across the board.

So how would a disciple of Christ examine the terms? Would they care only about the overt, intentional racism or the still-harmful unconscious and systemic forms? It seems to me that Christ taught to look for need, not just think about intent.

Link to post
35 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

So how would a disciple of Christ examine the terms? Would they care only about the overt, intentional racism or the still-harmful unconscious and systemic forms? It seems to me that Christ taught to look for need, not just think about intent.

A disciple (or non-disciple, for that matter) of Christ would be wise to express their meaning in terms, or contextualize the term as necessary, in ways best suited for their audience to facilitate constructive discussion and inspire appropriate actions.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, CV75 said:

A disciple (or non-disciple, for that matter) of Christ would be wise to express their meaning in terms, or contextualize the term as necessary, in ways best suited for their audience to facilitate constructive discussion and inspire appropriate actions.

Yup. And then look to understand others as well as much as one is trying to be understood.  

Further, when looking out for the least among us, being aware of the impact of trauma and abuse also helps. 

Link to post
1 hour ago, gopher said:

It's just entertaining to see how far it has to go before the mods step in.

Maybe this thread is a good valve to let off some soft steam. Why be a part of cancel culture? :)

  • Like 2
Link to post

Just saw this:

Quote

A majority of people believe Black Lives Matter, the anti-racism movement that spread across the UK this summer, has increased racial tension, according to a poll.

Just over half (55%) of UK adults believe the BLM protests that took place in big cities but also in the Shetland Islands and the Isle of Wight, increased racial tensions, according to a survey of more than 2,000 people by pollsters Opinium. Only 17% of the people polled in October disagreed. The polling also showed 44% of ethnic minorities felt BLM increased racial tensions.

The findings, which BLM organisers said showed the movement has exposed existing fault lines, comes alongside parallel research indicating sharp rises in the number of black people saying they faced discrimination in the last year, rising from 74% in 2019 to 81%. In a possible sign of racism arising from the origin of Covid-19 in Wuhan, the proportion of Chinese people saying they faced discrimination over the same period rose from 68% to 76%, according to polling carried out in June.

Opinium’s annual survey of multicultural Britain also found that 71% of Asian people had suffered discrimination or abuse because of their ethnicity, rising to 81% among black people.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to post

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying because my simple mind simply cannot grasp anything more complex, but this is the problem I see with Black Lives Matter: Can one be against racism and yet not support Black Lives Matter?  I believe so, but that sort of nuance isn't welcome in the current hypervigilant, cancel-culture-driven, "if-you-ain't-with-us-you're-against-us" ethos.  Don't support BLM?  You're racist! <_< :rolleyes:  I was a huge Utah Jazz fan before I failed the anti-racism and political correctness tests one must pass to prove one's fealty to the league, and before the league ... as a policy and as an organization ... said, "Don't support BLM?  You're racist!"  

  • Like 1
Link to post
22 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Just saw this:

Thanks,

-Smac

In my experience, opening up the topic alone will increase discomfort, but the level of tension created out of that depends on how constructively that discomfort is shared and processed. It definitely needs to be talked about (including protesting) openly and frankly, but also appreciating the need do do so as brothers and sisters.

  • Like 1
Link to post
11 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying because my simple mind simply cannot grasp anything more complex, but this is the problem I see with Black Lives Matter: Can one be against racism and yet not support Black Lives Matter?  I believe so, but that sort of nuance isn't welcome in the current hypervigilant, cancel-culture-driven, "if-you-ain't-with-us-you're-against-us" ethos.  Don't support BLM?  You're racist! <_< :rolleyes:  I was a huge Utah Jazz fan before I failed the anti-racism and political correctness tests one must pass to prove one's fealty to the league, and before the league ... as a policy and as an organization ... said, "Don't support BLM?  You're racist!"  

Why can't you be a fan still?

Link to post
13 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Why can't you be a fan still?

Others' mileage may vary, and some (perhaps many) will be able to wade through and/or to disregard the political garbage, but my father is a retired police officer, and my brother and my cousin serve currently as police officers.  For me, it's a matter of principle.  And I cannot, for the life of me, understand how someone can continue to be a fan of a league that thinks he's racist.  It's that simple.

Edited by Kenngo1969
  • Like 1
Link to post
7 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Others' mileage may vary, and some (perhaps many) will be able to wade through and/or to disregard the political garbage, but my father is a retired police officer, and my brother and my cousin serve currently as police officers.  For me, it's a matter of principle.  And I cannot, for the life of me, understand how someone can continue to be a fan of a league that thinks he's racist.  It's that simple.

I don't think they are lumping all of our "blue" lives together. Hope not, or I'd be in your boat! Where do they say this? 

Link to post
19 hours ago, why me said:

Organizing demonstrations takes money and people. It just doesn't happen without a central organizing committee. And yes, foundations do provide money to organizations that organize people to support causes that the foundation supports. I took part in many demonstrations in the 1970s. Buses were rented, signs were professionally made and money was received. And where did some of the money come from? The Soviet Union which was the main contributor to the communist party usa. I know because I was there.

Why did the demonstrations stop so suddenly? Quite amazing that all of them just disappeared. Has the circumstances behind the demonstrations suddenly improved? Biden? I do believe he sponsored the crime bill that sent many blacks to prison during clinton's time and beyond. And did he not call them 'predators'? And did not Harris find pride in convicting many of them? And I do believe that Trump set many of them free thanks to Kim and Kanye. This is not a political post, just a post to show that there are puppeteers behind the puppets even if the puppets do not know they are puppets.

https://www.open society foundations .org/grants

The above link

is my case in point.

 

Wrong.

It takes people. It doesn’t take money. The organization was, at most, posting guides on what to wear and what to bring and what not to bring but it was individuals giving advice and not some organizing committee. There was some organization but it was small groups. People with medical training agreed to set up a tent together, a group of people decide to bring food and water and tell everyone where they will be.

There was no central organizing committee. Who is on this committee? This should be a simple question to answer if there is one.

They stopped because the fervor died down. They didn’t all stop at once either. Some areas faded in days with occasional resurgences. Portland had tear gas showers almost every night for months.

The circumstances have improved. I talked about that earlier. Biden has a limited wishlist to address concerns but much more importantly city governments have made changes. It remains if they will end up being empty noise or real reform and it will probably vary across the country.

The crime bill you are talking about was a disaster but it was a bipartisan bill. It gave the Right the “tough on crime” thing that was in vogue and the various mandatory minimum and three strikes and all the rest of the stuff in that era was believed by many on the Left to be perfect to combat racial inequality (and many of them were in the “tough on crime” bandwagon as well). The protesters are not thrilled with the President and VP elects by any stretch. Many view them as centrists. They do see it as an improvement since Biden wanted to solve the grievances at the base of the problem and probably won’t pound the war drum screaming about how he is going to move in and end the protests with brute force. And again, most police reform will not take place on a national level in any case.

As to your link you could just save everyone some time and say you believe Soros is the great mastermind behind everything.

Your assertion that there have to be puppetmasters is more an article of faith to you than an established fact. Again, who is on this central organizing committee and why were most protest groups limited to someone on Facebook saying we should meet at Spot A if there was some grand conspiracy behind it. If there was a central committee they were both experts at hiding themselves completely while so incompetent that they controlled nothing. I don’t buy it.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I reject this characterisation and also the apparent underlying need to produce an equivalency whenever talking about partisan weakness.

White supremacy is a historical fact on the USA and it was embedded in its founding documents. It tore apart the nation and even after the war it continued to be a blight on our nation's character. The Civil Rights Act was less than 60 years ago. There's ample evidence that since then we've still had major problems with systemic racism.

There's no comparison. White supremacy a silly boogeyman? No, it's a reasonably expected issue that we must continue to work on.

I reject your rejection of my comparison.

Both groups are pathetic and evil.  I'm not arguing one is or was more evil.  Both were exploited to scare people into voting for certain candidates this past election cycle in the US by exaggerating their level of threat of danger.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying because my simple mind simply cannot grasp anything more complex, but this is the problem I see with Black Lives Matter: Can one be against racism and yet not support Black Lives Matter?  I believe so, but that sort of nuance isn't welcome in the current hypervigilant, cancel-culture-driven, "if-you-ain't-with-us-you're-against-us" ethos.  Don't support BLM?  You're racist! <_< :rolleyes:  I was a huge Utah Jazz fan before I failed the anti-racism and political correctness tests one must pass to prove one's fealty to the league, and before the league ... as a policy and as an organization ... said, "Don't support BLM?  You're racist!"  

I suppose you could but it is a weird stance. I am against racism but people protesting racially motivated killings....that I don’t like so much.

You probably dealt mostly with the extremists of the movement if that was your take. The ACAB (All Cops Are Bad) slogan came from the more extreme elements. They also won the rhetorical victory over “defund the police” vs. “police reform” but that was mostly accomplished due to calls for reform seeming too weak and because movements for racial equality have been down the milquetoast reform route before where noise is made about change but then nothing changes. It is also my perception but may not be accurate that the extreme elements of the movement were disproportionately white. My support went out more to the impassioned black college and high school kids in the early protests that were basically preaching to the police and explaining why they are human and that what is going on is wrong.

Some of the protests had amazingly touching moments. One where a holocaust survivor showed up and showed her tattoo and told them to keep on fighting to make sure it didn’t happen again. An impromptu dance party where two frail looking elderly women came down to see the protest not far from their homes and started dancing with the crowd. A war reporter who covered unrest in foreign nations teaching everyone how to deal with chemical irritants. The lady who lost an eye to a rubber bullet saying she will gladly give the other for the movement to succeed and laughed at how this one event immediately radicalized all her children. An impassioned twenty something leader calling on everyone to come back tomorrow and bring a friend and even told them to bring racist friends so they can see what the movement is about. That was the bulk of what was going on. The news only covered the violence and the criminal elements and went silent when things got “boring”. There is a horrible lesson in there somewhere. :( 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
6 minutes ago, gopher said:

I reject your rejection of my comparison.

Both groups are pathetic and evil.  I'm not arguing one is or was more evil.  Both were exploited to scare people into voting for certain candidates this past election cycle in the US by exaggerating their level of threat of danger.

Black Lives Matter is about much more than an election cycle and it has a legitimate mission. The BLM activists I know personally are active in their local communities, helping keep the police accountable, operating food pantries for their communities, rallying community support for people in crisis, and also helping organize peaceful protests when needed. They do significant good and are the epitome of "love one another."

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Just saw this:

Thanks,

-Smac

White people living in areas with minorities do not like being told racism is an ongoing issue and really don’t like any kind of self-examination they might be asked to do to figure out if they are part of the problem. This shocking new story has upended decades of research and is completely unexpected.

/sarcasm

  • Haha 1
Link to post
13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Wrong.

It takes people. It doesn’t take money. The organization was, at most, posting guides on what to wear and what to bring and what not to bring but it was individuals giving advice and not some organizing committee. There was some organization but it was small groups. People with medical training agreed to set up a tent together, a group of people decide to bring food and water and tell everyone where they will be.

There was no central organizing committee. Who is on this committee? This should be a simple question to answer if there is one.

They stopped because the fervor died down. They didn’t all stop at once either. Some areas faded in days with occasional resurgences. Portland had tear gas showers almost every night for months.

The circumstances have improved. I talked about that earlier. Biden has a limited wishlist to address concerns but much more importantly city governments have made changes. It remains if they will end up being empty noise or real reform and it will probably vary across the country.

The crime bill you are talking about was a disaster but it was a bipartisan bill. It gave the Right the “tough on crime” thing that was in vogue and the various mandatory minimum and three strikes and all the rest of the stuff in that era was believed by many on the Left to be perfect to combat racial inequality (and many of them were in the “tough on crime” bandwagon as well). The protesters are not thrilled with the President and VP elects by any stretch. Many view them as centrists. They do see it as an improvement since Biden wanted to solve the grievances at the base of the problem and probably won’t pound the war drum screaming about how he is going to move in and end the protests with brute force. And again, most police reform will not take place on a national level in any case.

As to your link you could just save everyone some time and say you believe Soros is the great mastermind behind everything.

Your assertion that there have to be puppetmasters is more an article of faith to you than an established fact. Again, who is on this central organizing committee and why were most protest groups limited to someone on Facebook saying we should meet at Spot A if there was some grand conspiracy behind it. If there was a central committee they were both experts at hiding themselves completely while so incompetent that they controlled nothing. I don’t buy it.

I agree with you! The marches around me weren't started by a big group, just anyone that felt like heading it up. On my end it started on FB and built up from there from someone from a town away by someone I know from an old ward, and a believing member of the church. I didn't get to go, but wanted to. I think BLM is an important move because we are seeing groups that are white supremacists break out, possibly because they think leaders in the white house welcome them. So BLM is significant, it's not Blue Lives Matter less. 

Link to post
15 hours ago, gopher said:

I agree Antifa is a silly boogeyman of the right, just like white supremacy is a silly boogeyman of the left.  It's clear the main opposition to BLM comes from the right because the BLM organization and most of their follower openly supported candidates on the left.  Maybe it's more fun to create conspiracy theories about the demonstrations and demonstrators than to admit it's mostly political. 

Patrisse Cullors, one of the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement:  "Alongside Black-led organizations around the nation, Black Lives Matter invested heavily in this election... We want something for our vote. We want to be heard and our agenda to be prioritized." 

From https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-matters-2020/:

"Yet again, Black folks did nothing short of saving our country. From coast to coast, our movement delivered record turnout in the general election. Now, we’ve got Georgia on our minds."

That's a good way to lose support from the millions that voted against your candidates.  Do you really expect BLM to have much more than 19%  support from Republicans (from Pew as of September) without being non-partisan?  I don't care for either party, but I'm not hopeful much will change without support from both sides.

What does it take to get this thread shut down?

I don’t play the false equivalency game. I saw the calls to the white supremacists to act and saw the Proud Boys ranting their hate. I saw cops treating the Proud Boys and the protesters differently I didn’t see Antifa. Well, I guess that is technically not true. I did see one guy who dressed as an “Antifa super soldier” as a joke.

Admittedly lately some of the far right have stopped seeing the police as allies. It is almost adorable watching some of them now argue that the CIA is now controlled by the far left and is plotting a communist coup in this country. History definitely shows that the CIA is keenly interested in spreading communism worldwide and at home.

It is hard to have no partisan leaning when the leader of one party is constantly screaming on social media about how he is not being allowed to flex his military might and crush you completely like he wants to.

Link to post
13 minutes ago, gopher said:

I reject your rejection of my comparison.

Both groups are pathetic and evil.  I'm not arguing one is or was more evil.  Both were exploited to scare people into voting for certain candidates this past election cycle in the US by exaggerating their level of threat of danger.

Quote

Among DVEs, racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists—specifically white supremacist extremists9 (WSEs)—will remain the most persistent and lethal threat in the Homeland. Spikes in
other DVE threats probably will depend on
political or social issues that often mobilize other ideological actors to violence, such as immigration, environmental, and police-related policy issues.
• WSEs have demonstrated longstanding intent to target racial and religious minorities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, politicians, and those they believe promote multi-culturalism and globalization at the expense of the WSE identity. Since 2018, they have conducted more lethal attacks in the United States than any other DVE movement.
• Some WSEs have engaged in outreach and networking opportunities abroad with
like-minded individuals to expand their violent extremist networks. Such outreach might lead to a greater risk of mobilization to violence, including traveling to conflict zones.
• Other racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists could seek to exploit concerns about social injustice issues to incite violence and exploit otherwise peaceful protests movements.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/2020_10_06_homeland-threat-assessment.pdf

Link to post
20 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I suppose you could but it is a weird stance. I am against racism but people protesting racially motivated killings....that I don’t like so much.

Anybody who doesn't agree with you in every particular about any given issue has a "weird" stance.  :rolleyes:  That's the dog-bites-man-est story of all dog-bites-man stories.  In other news, ice is cold, and water is wet.

P.S.: And "protest" is one thing: knock yourself out exercising your constitutional rights.  Hell, I might even join you.  Arson, other vandalism, looting, assault, and, sometimes, murder is a completely different deal.  Protesting racism is like protesting rain: As I've said several times on the topic, if one had asked someone at a march, sit-in, or other type of protest led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Why are you here?" that person would have been ready with an answer: "We want to be able to eat here [or want Blacks to be able to eat here] just like anyone else," et cetera.  They favored specific measures that would ensure equal treatment of all races.  What specific measures does BLM, or do protesters in general , favor?  It's really hard to tell.  I can be, and am, against racism in any of its forms.  But it's one thing to be against racism; it's another to favor "Proposition A" that, if passed, would lead to "Reform B."  And Reform B might be just what police in Anytown A USA  (and its citizens) need; it might do nothing at all, though, to solve the problems in Anytown B USA and/or with Anytown B USA PD.

Edited by Kenngo1969
Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:
Quote

Just saw this:

Thanks,

-Smac

White people living in areas with minorities do not like being told racism is an ongoing issue

I'm not sure about that.  I don't think anyone seriously believes that racism is not "an ongoing issue."

Rather, I think the issue may be more that white people (or, indeed, people of any racial category) do not like being baselessly accused of racism by strangers.

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

and really don’t like any kind of self-examination they might be asked to do to figure out if they are part of the problem.

When the accusation of racism, of being "part of the problem" is based entirely on skin color, I think that's a real problem.

Blanket accusations, by strangers, along the lines of "You are white, ergo you are presumptively and necessarily racist" is not accurately described as "ask{ing}" people to engage in "self-examination."  They are, instead, despicable, hateful, and as immoral as race-based judgments of yesteryear.

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

This shocking new story has upended decades of research and is completely unexpected.

/sarcasm

I'm not sure that sneering sarcasm is helpful in this context.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to post
1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Black Lives Matter is about much more than an election cycle and it has a legitimate mission. The BLM activists I know personally are active in their local communities, helping keep the police accountable, operating food pantries for their communities, rallying community support for people in crisis, and also helping organize peaceful protests when needed. They do significant good and are the epitome of "love one another."

Remember, we were talking about Antifa and white supremacists, not BLM.  No doubt there are good BLM activists out there.

Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I don’t play the false equivalency game. I saw the calls to the white supremacists to act and saw the Proud Boys ranting their hate. I saw cops treating the Proud Boys and the protesters differently I didn’t see Antifa. Well, I guess that is technically not true. I did see one guy who dressed as an “Antifa super soldier” as a joke.

Admittedly lately some of the far right have stopped seeing the police as allies. It is almost adorable watching some of them now argue that the CIA is now controlled by the far left and is plotting a communist coup in this country. History definitely shows that the CIA is keenly interested in spreading communism worldwide and at home.

It is hard to have no partisan leaning when the leader of one party is constantly screaming on social media about how he is not being allowed to flex his military might and crush you completely like he wants to.

Proud boys deny they are white supremacists.  They are still idiots.

I do think many on the right are calling anyone who looted, vandalized, or attacked law enforcement members of Antifa, even though they aren't.  It's just easier to lump them all together.

It's much more satisfying to believe both sides are bad (BSAB).  Then you don't have to defend the ridiculous things those on your team says and does.  You should join me!  I've escaped DC for the suburbs, but I spent enough time working under both parties to have little trust in either.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Anybody who doesn't agree with you in every particular about any given issue has a "weird" stance.  :rolleyes:  That's the dog-bites-man-est story of all dog-bites-man stories.  In other news, ice is cold, and water is wet.

P.S.: And "protest" is one thing: knock yourself out exercising your constitutional rights.  Hell, I might even join you.  Arson, other vandalism, looting, assault, and, sometimes, murder is a completely different deal.  Protesting racism is like protesting rain: As I've said several times on the topic, if one had asked someone at a march, sit-in, or other type of protest led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., "Why are you here?" that person would have been ready with an answer: "We want to be able to eat here [or want Blacks to be able to eat here] just like anyone else," et cetera.  They favored specific measures that would ensure equal treatment of all races.  What specific measures does BLM, or do protesters in general , favor?  It's really hard to tell.  I can be, and am, against racism in any of its forms.  But it's one thing to be against racism; it's another to favor "Proposition A" that, if passed, would lead to "Reform B."  And Reform B might be just what police in Anytown A USA  (and its citizens) need; it might do nothing at all, though, to solve the problems in Anytown B USA and/or with Anytown B USA PD.

That should be obvious based on what started the whole thing. They want police to stop murdering them and to stop racially discriminating against them. If that fails they want those who do kill them to be punished as murderers. There is debate on how to achieve the goal but the goal is clear.

Link to post
13 minutes ago, gopher said:

Proud boys deny they are white supremacists.  They are still idiots.

I do think many on the right are calling anyone who looted, vandalized, or attacked law enforcement members of Antifa, even though they aren't.  It's just easier to lump them all together.

It's much more satisfying to believe both sides are bad (BSAB).  Then you don't have to defend the ridiculous things those on your team says and does.  You should join me!  I've escaped DC for the suburbs, but I spent enough time working under both parties to have little trust in either.

I have no problem believing both sides do things for which shame is the proper response (and some thing for which execution is the proper response) but I don’t find them equivalent. Plus “a plague on both your houses” generally means I do nothing.

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...