WSJ to BLM: Rather than scapegoat police, why not focus on bad schools and job-killing regulations?

[Pale Man In Black]

...

But that disregards the general disingenuousness behind the op ed. There are plenty of black organizations, large and small, that focus on those issues. Why is it that no one ever writes about their efforts? Why is there such an obsession with attacking this specific black organization but no support for those others who are supposedly doing the right thing?

Why don't you ask the ones writing about this stuff?
If you are referring the question to this forum, why don't you write about them?

 

[ripskater]

It's easier to blame racism, pig cops and whitey than it is to face the reality that there is something terribly wrong in the urban black community.

 

[Pale Man In Black]

It's easier to blame racism, pig cops and whitey than it is to face the reality that there is something terribly wrong in the urban black community.

Seems like a pattern of blaming everybody and everything but themselves.
Is normal.

 

[DrDune]

THis line of reasoning never made sense to me. The organization came into existence centered around the sense that the killing of young black people wasn't being taken seriously by the law. Why would their scope of interest be broader than that just because of their name?

The National Rifle Association doesn't defend all of the Bill of Rights, it has a specific focus and that's where it directs its efforts.

But that disregards the general disingenuousness behind the op ed. There are plenty of black organizations, large and small, that focus on those issues. Why is it that no one ever writes about their efforts? Why is there such an obsession with attacking this specific black organization but no support for those others who are supposedly doing the right thing?

You truthfully believe that BLM and their grievances SOLELY focus on their embattled relationship with the police?

Directly from DeRay McKesson, a leader of BLM, regarding his meeting with President Barack Obama:

"We had a really strong conversation," Mckesson said. "We covered so many topics from policing contracts to use-of-force policies to Flint and the school-to-prison pipeline to the upcoming Supreme Court nomination."

Directly from the BLM webpage in their "About" section:

...Black Lives Matter is a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes.

It goes beyond the narrow nationalism that can be prevalent within Black communities, which merely call on Black people to love Black, live Black and buy Black, keeping straight cis Black men in the front of the movement while our sisters, queer and trans and disabled folk take up roles in the background or not at all.

Black Lives Matter affirms the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, black-undocumented folks, folks with records, women and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. It centers those that have been marginalized within Black liberation movements. It is a tactic to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

By their very own regard, they are much more than what you attempted to portray them as. In essence, I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Deleted member 196663]

Professional agitator. It's rivaling the tech sector in emerging job markets.

 

[ripskater]

Seems like a pattern of blaming everybody and everything but themselves.
Is normal.

Losers tend to blame everyone else. And these urban black kids are fed racism and race baiting from the time they are young. Whitey, racism and cops are holding you down. So like you said they never look actually look themselves when they analyze why they are where they are in life.

 

[Huked on foniks]

THis line of reasoning never made sense to me. The organization came into existence centered around the sense that the killing of young black people wasn't being taken seriously by the law. Why would their scope of interest be broader than that just because of their name?

The National Rifle Association doesn't defend all of the Bill of Rights, it has a specific focus and that's where it directs its efforts.

But that disregards the general disingenuousness behind the op ed. There are plenty of black organizations, large and small, that focus on those issues. Why is it that no one ever writes about their efforts? Why is there such an obsession with attacking this specific black organization but no support for those others who are supposedly doing the right thing?

Lol. Probably because right now BLM is the most influential black group whether you like it or not Of course they're going to be the most scrutinized. You get confused by the weirdest shit. Like earlier today you couldn't figure out why people would get annoyed by a kids show character (Elmo) being used to spread liberal propaganda.

You're a weird one

I wouldn't hold your breath for a response.

So much for that idea Eh bud?

 

[ManCityFC9]

A Better Direction for Black Lives Matter
Rather than scapegoat police, why not focus on bad schools and job-killing regulations?
By Jason L. Riley | June 27, 2017​

Will Black Lives Matter soon suffer the fate of other separatist “black power” movements in the 1920s and 1960s, which captured America’s attention for a period but ultimately did little to help advance the black underclass?

The Black Lives Matter movement got its start after George Zimmerman’s 2013 acquittal for fatally shooting Trayvon Martin and found its footing a year later when Michael Brown was shot dead after attacking a police officer in Ferguson, Mo. By 2016, BLM activists were being hosted by President Obama and disrupting campaign events for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Today, major news organizations such at National Public Radio and the Washington Post turn to BLM representatives for comment on race-related stories.

An obituary for a movement that has become so prominent so fast seems premature, but a recent BuzzFeed article that included interviews with dozens of BLM-linked activists was pessimistic about the group’s future. Factions have formed, infighting is common and objectives are unclear. “Black Lives Matter is still here. Its groups are still organizing. But Black Lives Matter is on the verge of losing the traction and momentum that sparked a national shift on criminal justice policy,” wrote reporter Darren Sands. And “activists largely agreed that the identity of the movement, its existential purpose and aim, remains unresolved.”

Some BLM leaders want to integrate political institutions further. Others want the organization to expand its focus to immigrants’ rights. Still others want to create a society “free from pain being inflicted on it by police, racist structures, and capitalism.” Apparently, there are places in the world where blacks living in noncapitalist societies are thriving in comparison with their U.S. brethren.

On a certain level, the decision by BLM activists to single out policing as a major obstacle to black advancement has always defied comprehension. Police shootings have fallen dramatically in recent decades. In New York City, for example, cops shot 314 people in 1971, 93 of them fatally. In 2015, New York police shot 23 people, killing eight. Which means that police shootings and fatalities in the nation’s most populous city have declined by more than 90% over the past 4½ decades. A 2016 paper released by Harvard economist Roland Fryer examined the use of force by police since 2000 in some of the country’s largest urban areas and found that “blacks are 23.8 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites.”

In theory, there is no reason these activists couldn’t play a more useful role in helping blacks overcome obstacles and take advantage of opportunities that were unavailable to previous generations. But that would mean abandoning nonsensical narratives that scapegoat law enforcement for high black crime rates and instead picking more substantive fights with fellow progressives.

Why not side with the hundreds of thousands of black children nationwide who linger on waiting lists for charter schools that have a proven record of narrowing the achievement gap? Why side with progressive politicians who stunt the growth of charters out of deference to powerful teachers unions that oppose school choice?

A University of Illinois at Chicago paper released earlier this month reports that 85% of black teenagers in Chicago are out of work, versus 73.4% of whites. Among 20- to 24-year-olds, the black jobless rate is 60%, or more than double the rate for comparable whites. In 2014, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel approved legislation that raises the minimum wage in increments by more than 57% by 2018. Studies have long shown that younger and less experienced workers are particularly sensitive to rises in the wage floor. And even minimum-wage hikes that don’t put people out of work can leave them worse off.

A new National Bureau of Economic Research report looked at the consequences of Seattle’s decision to raise its minimum wage to $13 last year from $9.47 in 2015. The researchers concluded that the increase “reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by around 9 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent. Consequently, total payroll fell for such jobs, implying that the minimum wage ordinance lowered low-wage employees’ earnings by an average of $125 per month in 2016.” When are BLM activists going to take the Democrats to task for promoting policies that harm minority workers disproportionately? When the unemployment rate for black teens reaches 100%?

Of course, improving educational and employment prospects for the black underclass would lower black crime rates and thus go a long way toward reducing encounters with police, the goal that is so near and dear to the Black Lives Matter movement. It’s a win-win, but first the activists have to decide whether the real goal is to help black people or to help themselves.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-better-direction-for-black-lives-matter-1498604674?nan_pid=1861112654

Good article buddy
-I might have to stop being a cheap arse and subscribe to WSJ

Spot on with their assessment; it correlates with my criticism of BLM, and its lack of scope and focus.
-There still a bit of hope, maybe in a current state of multiple factions, there can emerge a significant leadership force for BLM running off of logic and fact-based decision making rather than emotion.

I am not much of a fan of race-based groups(they seem more divisive than anything) but BLM should definitely question their political alliances and put the politicians to task. Too many AAs vote blindly against their own prosperity and progress.
- At times, it's just a lack of perspective
(what seems good with the liberal agenda, may not correlate with empirical data and may in fact be against ones own interest.)

Good Thread

Cheers

 

[Pale Man In Black]

LOL they're intruding upon the rainbow brigade, as of late. Can't have another group of special misfits hogging all the attention, now, can we?

 

[Huked on foniks]

Edit.

 

[Huked on foniks]

You truthfully believe that BLM and their grievances SOLELY focus on their embattled relationship with the police?

Directly from DeRay McKesson, a leader of BLM, regarding his meeting with President Barack Obama:



Directly from the BLM webpage in their "About" section:



http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

By their very own regard, they are much more than what you attempted to portray them as. In essence, I have no idea what you're talking about.

@FIMN, Hopefully you didn't hold your breath.

 

[Der Eisbär]

I love the way this translated, but just fyi it should be "get into it".

Otherwise it sounds like you're talking about penis in vagina.

PS-My android phone has vagina in its dictionary but underlined penis.

lol sorry was typing during work going in and out of tabs

 

[bobgeese]

I thought they disappeared after their funding ran out?


Scratch that, I think they just terrorize gay pride parades nowadays.

 

[AviatorShades]

You truthfully believe that BLM and their grievances SOLELY focus on their embattled relationship with the police?

Directly from DeRay McKesson, a leader of BLM, regarding his meeting with President Barack Obama:



Directly from the BLM webpage in their "About" section:



http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

By their very own regard, they are much more than what you attempted to portray them as. In essence, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Yeah they are basically raving lunatics on every topic

http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/


We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

 

[IDL]

Yeah they are basically raving lunatics on every topic

http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

That's kinda what happens when you have the Soros and pals money in the background.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

THis line of reasoning never made sense to me. The organization came into existence centered around the sense that the killing of young black people wasn't being taken seriously by the law. Why would their scope of interest be broader than that just because of their name?

The National Rifle Association doesn't defend all of the Bill of Rights, it has a specific focus and that's where it directs its efforts.

But that disregards the general disingenuousness behind the op ed. There are plenty of black organizations, large and small, that focus on those issues. Why is it that no one ever writes about their efforts? Why is there such an obsession with attacking this specific black organization but no support for those others who are supposedly doing the right thing?

This

 

[nhbbear]

I would like to think that if the number of murders and shootings in the black community went way down, that less law enforcement officers would be as apt to shoot a black person running away or turning, making movements towards their waist, etc. I believe that would be the case, but I could not say with absolute certainty.

Police get blamed for pretty much everything. The last two murders, our officers were blamed, despite one occurring after a subject broke into a drug house. His mother blamed police, despite the fact that she and her husband ran a drug house for many years. The other murder was after two brothers beat up another guy, which set into motion a series of retaliatory events, leading to a shooting. At the hospital, the brother that survived, was yelling at our guys, blaming them. The murder before that, the family was only concerned if their family member was shot by police. When told that police did not shoot him, they were happy? Whether they intended payback, or only cared if it was police that shot him, I don't know.

 

[sangreporsangre]

Not sure about in the US, but here in Toronto BLM seems to literally exist for no other reason than to agitate to get their cronies into "diversity officer" type jobs. They had another "moment" at the Pride parade on Sunday, where they weren't registered as a group in the parade but then barged in at the last minute, setting off their fruity multi couloured smoke bombs.

 

[LiveFreeorDie]

THis line of reasoning never made sense to me. The organization came into existence centered around the sense that the killing of young black people wasn't being taken seriously by the law. Why would their scope of interest be broader than that just because of their name?

The National Rifle Association doesn't defend all of the Bill of Rights, it has a specific focus and that's where it directs its efforts.

But that disregards the general disingenuousness behind the op ed. There are plenty of black organizations, large and small, that focus on those issues. Why is it that no one ever writes about their efforts? Why is there such an obsession with attacking this specific black organization but no support for those others who are supposedly doing the right thing?

If they want to get to the root of why young black men are being stereotyped, maybe education and jobs JUST MIGHT BE PART OF IT.

 

[Lex Bigelow]

The answer has been on the table for a very long time. But we know that public schools are a jobs program first. Vouchers.
What product would you ever buy, that is unbeholden to markets, other than public education, which the community buys for you? It's a devil's deal. Then if you put your kid in a private school you still pay the taxes for other people school.
Have no kids? Too bad. You're paying for others people's kids' education. As long as we're going to make the community pay at least introduce choice and competition.