Opinion of BLM

Quote from: President Johnson on October 12, 2020, 04:29:39 PM

Freedom movement!

I don't consider the minority of rioters part of BLM. These are troublemakers who use BLM or any other unrest for their purposes and hurt the movement as such. I think the problem is that some folks who dislike BLM think it's anti-white, when most activists just want equal treatment, not special treatment.

Sincere liberals want to believe this. Sincere liberals are against racism. Sincere liberals are against Fascism. (Indeed, sincere liberals are against Bolshevism; this is where I start to lose people.) There is an internal disconnect when an organization whose name is that of an important Ideal is seen on TV as (along with Antifa, another organization whose name is that of an important Ideal) engaging in rioting, looting, arson, and violence against persons; it's a moral dissonance that can't be reconciled. "They're supposed to be the good guys; why are they doing this?" is, I believe, the internal reaction people have when they see people burning buildings, harassing and intimidating people, engaging in vandalism, having "Fiery, but mostly peaceful protests", etc. It comforts people to tell themselves that these protests were "hijacked by troublemakers" and that BLM and Antifa are really what they are.

The logical question is this: If you're "the good guys", why would you pursue a strategy of street demonstrations when seemingly all of them end up being hijacked? Why would you allow your good name to be sullied? Isn't that defeating the purpose? Why would you not shift tactics to something that cannot be hijacked, where you are saying what you want?

The answer to this is because the actual folks who make up the BLM and Antifa organizations are quite OK with the violence. The looting may not be part of their itinerary of activities, but their organization of the "protests" make it possible, and they know it. Indeed, they count on it happening. The goal of these organizations is to intimidate, and they've been successful about that. If intimidation is your thing, then I suppose they are a Freedom Movement. If it's not, it should give people pause for thought.

One thing to understand about BLM, the organization, is that it is a Marxist Organization. Patrice Cullors and Alicia Garza, founders of BLM, don't even hide this. This isn't hyperbole; Patrice Cullors actually said this, and I'm hard-pressed to come up reasons not to take her at her word. As such, this is an organization that has Marxist Goals, and it begs honest liberals to consider if that's what THEY wish for their country and their World.

Of course Black Lives Matter. They matter as much as any other lives. They haven't always mattered that much to the rest of America; that wasn't right, and to the degree it's true today, it's not right in the present tense and ought to be remedied, and remedied quickly. While I believe that the narrative of Systemic Racism (particularly as it applies to Law Enforcement) doesn't hold water, there ARE issues of use of force by police officers that would save lives without jeopardizing public safety.

There IS a legitimate revulsion toward the incredibly high numbers of persons we have in prison, on probation, or burdened with a felony criminal record, and it's not wrong to suggest that there's something amiss when blacks (and, especially young black males) consider an amazingly disproportionate number of folks in this situation. Criminal Laws need to be "reimagined", dialed back, and "overcriminalization" needs to be legislatively remedied, and remedied retroactively. (This could be done next year if people were serious.) We could end the idea of a criminal record being forever. (I believe that the nation has more of an interest in eliminating the unemployability of people with criminal records than it does in preserving criminal justice intelligence.) I'm all for this, and people are all for this.

Such changes that I've mentioned would be CONSENSUS changed. Most people in America would be for them. They would have immediate impact. They would make things better right away. There was a CONSENSUS revulsion toward George Floyd's death, and there is CONSENSUS for examining many of the criminal justice issues that BLM raises.

BLM and Antifa don't want constructive change, however. They want something else, and their willingness to facilitate the rioting, looting, arson, intimidations and harassment of persons, etc. isn't my idea of a "Freedom" anything.

I grew up during the civil rights movement and I don't recall MLK's marches being hijacked by rioters and looters. I don't recall the Poor People's March of 1968 hijacked by arsonists. The violence in their events were brought by what Mike Royko described as "the worst elements of Southern Beer-Belly Manhood" that were allowed to provide the response. The same could not be said for the post-John Lewis SNCC, or other leftist movements such as the Weather Underground (whose leaders Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn have been normalized by the Left). It IS possible, under desperate circumstances, to not resort to violence in pursuit of a difficult goal; it's why MLK is lionized while Stokely Carmichael is forgotten and H. Rap Brown is serving a life sentence for murdering two (2) police officers. The "hijacking" of demonstrations is an unconvincing argument. MLK's didn't get hijacked and the violent demonstrations were led by men who wanted to "go there". (Stokely Carmichael proposed changing SNCC's name to the Student NATIONAL Coordinating Committee. In his lifetime, Carmichael stated: "In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience. The United States has none." Those demonstrations went violent because their leaders were OK with it.

America DOES have a conscience; it has more of a conscience than most nations. The question is one of how much can something be a "Freedom Movement" if it holds the Stokely Carmichael viewpoint.

	Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. May 19, 2024, 03:05:06 PM

News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more