For what it's worth, I didn't see or read any of the things I dislike on them in right wing media. It's too dishonest to get an accurate picture.
I wouldn't say their demands are reasonable. Reparations for colonialism for example? Silly.
Would any of you consider DeRay Mckesson a reasonable voice within BLM? Or would this be one of the people you would classify as one of the extremists in the minority? Because I've seen an interview with him and he sounded like a complete lunatic.
Another thing which bothers me about them is that they suddenly sprouted up in the UK. They don't have any justifiable reason to be here. I don't know if BLM have distanced themselves from the movement in the UK or not, but if they haven't that would be :\
Minority fringe group within BLM. The majority are about being treated equally by cops. For example, the white guy who shot his gun in Comet Ping Pong Pizza here in DC the other day- taken in without a problem. If he'd been an unarmed black man, he'd have been dead, despite this being "Chocolate City". In addition, this guy was never once called a "terrorist" by the media, but would have been if he'd been an arab.
Yeah, the UK BLM is a minority fringe group. But it would help if BLM leaders would disown them. If they have already, my mistake, but I haven't seen evidence they have thus far.
Also, whilst it's possible that the moron who shot up comet ping pong would have been shot dead had he been black, that is pure speculation. And the media were completely correct in not calling him a terrorist. He didn't shoot the place up to further any political aims, he did so because he was a maniac who believed in a conspiracy theory. There is a big difference.
vladykins @ 9/12/2016 15:51
Wikey @ 8/12/2016 17:18
I do agree it's a minority btw, but extreme minorities often tend to exert a disproportionate amount of influence. It would help if the reasonable people in these movements condemned the radicals more.
I hear this all the time about terrorist attacks, yet it is Muslim groups who are the first to condemn. But it gets ignored because it doesn't fit people's preconceived notions.
For example, I'd like to see all white people immediately bring the KKK to heel. When's that gonna happen? Why haven't white people stopped them? Why aren't Xians on the whole condemning abortion clinic shooters? Why are they labeled "mentally ill individuals" while a similar Muslim doing a similar thing is immediately a terrorist?
This is the problem orgs like BLM are fighting against. Not "reparations for slavery", though there will always be the whackos like that.
I'm not sure I buy that Muslim groups are always the first to condemn terror attacks. Some do for sure! But I think there are plenty that remain silent. And as we have found out in the UK, there are some that not only don't condemn it, but encourage it too :\ We had a lovely chap called Anjem Choudary over here who openly praised terrorists and encouraged radicalization. He got away with it for ages! And sadly, pieces of shit like him aren't isolated cases.
Your "all white people should condemn the KKK" idea makes no sense to me. The KKK do not represent all white people. They represent the KKK. If a bunch of wackos from the KKK were going around burning crosses and lynching black people, whilst the organisation proclaimed itself to be a peaceful movement, I would fully expect everyone who considers themselves a leader within the KKK condemn such actions.
On the flip side, I would never expect all black people to condemn stupid shit carried out by BLM. Because BLM do not represent all black people. And I would never expect all Muslims to condemn terrorist attacks.
All in all, all I want to see is the leaders of these organisations and the high profile voices condemning this kind of stuff.
Christian groups should condemn abortion clinic shooters (sidenote: Abortion Clinic Shooters are terrorists, because it is political)
Muslim groups should condemn Islamists
BLM should condemn Cop Killers/Black Supremacists etc
And they should do it consistently. It's absolutely in their interests to so if they claim such things are not what they stand for. But what I see a lot of instead is the leaders of these org's making excuses or dodging the issue.
Furthermore, it seems to me that many high profile voices seem to spout things that are a million miles away from the peaceful and reasonable platform of the movement. Within BLM for example, there is DeRay Mckesson, who I brought up in a previous post. Again, I'm not sure how big a name he is in BLM, but he is certainly considered big enough to warrant an interview. The way he talks about white people is the same way the extreme right talks about the Jews. It's ludicrous. Do BLM leaders condemn him? Do they distance themselves from him? I'd like to see the evidence for that if so. A movement is its leaders.
Regarding media bias, I don't buy the notion that reporters shy away from proclaiming white people terrorists. Because I see it all the time over here (perhaps it's different in the UK). For example, before the Brexit referendum, a right wing terrorist shot and killed an MP (Jo Cox), yelling "Britain First" as he did it. It's generally accepted that it was an act of terrorism, and rightfully so. (Of course, you probably won't see him referred to as such in The Daily Mail or The Sun, but you would on the BBC). The phrase he shouted is essentially what members of the EDL shout at their rallies. I don't like the EDL, but to their credit, they came out and condemned the attack. There is no evidence that they directly radicalized him and it likely he was a lone wolf, but they condemned him because there was a clear link between what what he did and what the organisation believes in.
Another example would be the IRA. I don't think anybody in the media denies that when a bunch of White Nationalists went around bombing the UK, they were terrorists.
Also, to respond to your last point, it's alright saying that the reparations for slavery thing is pushed by a minority of whackos...but if that is the case, why is it listed as one of BLM's official demands?
The above website appears to be affiliated with BLM. Correct me if I am wrong.
Are we to say that the people who made these demands are part of the minority of whackos? Because if they are, they seem to be in charge of the movement :\
vladykins @ 9/12/2016 15:55
Chris25 @ 8/12/2016 18:01
vladykins @ 8/12/2016 15:44
Wikey @ 8/12/2016 13:47
I don't understand how someone saying they don't see race should be considered offensive. Ain't that what MLK wanted? I think it's a very idealistic thing to say and I don't think it helps the conversation about problems that perhaps still remain, but fheh. I can't get outraged about that.
I've done a bit of reading on Tomi Lahren. Apparently she did compare BLM to the KKK which is a bit (: Statements like that are bound to generate controversy.
This might not be a popular opinion but I don't like BLM going by what I have seen and read. However, comparing them to the KKK is silly. But I haven't seen anything by Lahren that would leave me thinking she is vile as of yet!
Also, @Chris I think it's fair to say there hasn't been a better time to be alive full stop, regardless of sex and race.
BLM is given a lot of shit by right wing media. It's not a bad org, it's not a black-power org by the slightest, and while some outspoken folks in that organization are idiots does not mean the whole org is full of them. It's kind of like knocking all feminists saying they want to rule over men because there are a couple who say shit like that, when most feminists just want *equal* treatment.
Are you trying to say that ALL lives matter?
All Lives Matter is a cop out. It's a way to say "Hey, it's not my fault!" when you don't do anything to change the matter. It's also like going to a Breast Cancer Walk and say "But what about all other causes of death. Don't you care about those?" Of course that isn't the point- but it is a breast cancer walk- that's what it is focused on. Trying to shift the focus to all types of death just makes you look like what you are when you say that: an asshole with no clue and no real cares.
I don't think it makes you an asshole. But I agree that it is a pointless term which adds nothing to the conversation. It's a silly nitpick over BLM's name.
Ok to be fair Anjem Choudary is/was leader of Al-Muhajiroun, which is literally an extremist group. I don't know if this is the best example. Most moderate Muslims in the UK tend to think this guy is a whack job.
I personally don't think you can equate Muslim Terrorists with the KKK, at least not the group as it exists today. Ideologically, maybe? The KKK is a shit stain on humanity, but they do not kill indiscriminately like the more extreme muslim terror groups do. I think people would take white supremacy more seriously if they posed more of a threat, which might be a thing in the upcoming future.
I do however think you can make comparisions between Zionism, Islamism and White Supremacy.
I'm not sure I buy that Muslim groups are always the first to condemn terror attacks. Some do for sure! But I think there are plenty that remain silent. And as we have found out in the UK, there are some that not only don't condemn it, but encourage it too
See- here is the problem. I can say the same thing for when a white Xian guy goes into an abortion clinic and shoots a bunch of people. Some condemn it, but plenty remain silent or just say his is "crazy". And plenty more secretly support him.
No difference, except in how the rest of us treat it.
How can you have any pudding if you won't eat your meat?
I think if Christian extremists were as violent as Islamists are today nobody would have any problem calling them terrorists.
Referring to anti abortion shootings, this page contains a list of attacks over the past twenty years or so (Sry I keep linking these articles to prove a point (: I know, I so smart, I know how use wikipedia, but it's handy info)
The reason it seems like there is a double standard when it comes to Christian violence and Muslim violence (and any religious violence in general tbh) is because Muslim extremists are far more prolific. Hence they get more attention in the media.
#1 GOAT
