Americans please explain BLM to Europeans

[in the]

well yeah, accept acknowledging the truth isn't at the extreme of either end and lies somewhere in the middle isn't portraying yourself as a victim. it's being reasonable.

There's a problem with police conduct in America. It isn't every police department (usually just the bigger cities), and while it might disproportionately affect the black community, even bringing up a case where police misconduct resulted in the death of a white person is in the eyes of many BLM supporters an attempt at trying to divert the movement.

Yeah, if we're only supposed to care when the victim is black, I want no part in that.

The link JVS posted had some very reasonable proposals. Yet it doesn't coalesce with the bullshit of the protesters on the ground.


Even if the message is reasonable, a bunch of supporters acting like shitheads is going to make anyone apprehensive of taking them seriously.

 

[panamaican]

I've never run across it in real life but I'm not in college anymore and my neighborhood is mostly old white people so...yeah, not coming up here.

And I don't think they want anything tangible. It's more of an awareness movement. Seems primarily centered around the ages old problem of overly aggressive police action in black communities. It's not a new problem and bringing awareness to it isn't new either.

But the internet has allowed these previously local complaints to reach the national stage. You also have to credit the increase in civilians videotaping police behavior which brought general police brutality to the public conscience in a way that hadn't happened before. PRior to civilian tapes, police brutality was easily dismissed as the result of "something" the criminal must have done to justify it. The tapes demonstrated that sometimes there are just bad cops doing bad things.

Once the public accepted that many instances of police brutality weren't warranted by the victim's conduct, the black community was able to back up their claims that they were frequently the subject of that brutality. They organized a movement to further awareness of the specific type of profiling and brutality that they face.

Accordingly, jimmies were rustled and people were gotten to.

 

[VivaRevolution]

There's a problem with police conduct in America. It isn't every police department (usually just the bigger cities), and while it might disproportionately affect the black community, even bringing up a case where police misconduct resulted in the death of a white person is in the eyes of many BLM supporters an attempt at trying to divert the movement.

Yeah, if we're only supposed to care when the victim is black, I want no part in that.

The link JVS posted had some very reasonable proposals. Yet it doesn't coalesce with the bullshit of the protesters on the ground.


Even if the message is reasonable, a bunch of supporters acting like shitheads is going to make anyone apprehensive of taking them seriously.

I will admit that I have a real problem with BLM, because I think they aren't defining the problem correctly.

The Jim Crow war on drugs is what they should be trying to form a black movement to stop.

The militarization of police, is a issue for all.

I have some real questions as to why BLM can't seem to identify the problems as they are, but the potential answers all require me to wrap myself in tin-foil.

 

[Space]

I have some real questions as to why BLM can't seem to identify the problems as they are, but the potential answers all require me to wrap myself in tin-foil.

The reason why is because most of them are immature college kids who don't know better.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I will admit that I have a real problem with BLM, because I think they aren't defining the problem correctly.

The Jim Crow war on drugs is what they should be trying to form a black movement to stop.

The militarization of police, is a issue for all.

I have some real questions as to why BLM can't seem to identify the problems as they are, but the potential answers all require me to wrap myself in tin-foil.

They're sloppy and, at times, irresponsible, which is tragic because that is all the media and sheep focus on.

 

[VivaRevolution]

They're sloppy and, at times, irresponsible, which is tragic because that is all the media and sheep focus on.

I have a problem understanding the dynamics that would have to take place, for this to be a real activist movement, and not have some smart activist stand up and say, "Why aren't we talking about the Jim Crow war on drugs?"

This perplexes me..........................

 

[VivaRevolution]

The reason why is because most of them are immature college kids who don't know better.

But there aren't some who are sharp as a tack, and asking the right questions?

How do those questions get squashed?

Where is the discussion of the Jim Crow war on drugs?

 

[panamaican]

I will admit that I have a real problem with BLM, because I think they aren't defining the problem correctly.

The Jim Crow war on drugs is what they should be trying to form a black movement to stop.

The militarization of police, is a issue for all.

I have some real questions as to why BLM can't seem to identify the problems as they are, but the potential answers all require me to wrap myself in tin-foil.

They are defining the problem correctly. The over aggressive policing of black communities goes back well before the War on Drugs. The police were frequently a tool of segregationists used to threatening black communities that tried to raise their claims for equal treatment. The treatment didn't end just because segregation did. The police "community" in many areas was built on this type of mindset and it's become interwoven with some departments.

The War on Drugs was nothing more than an extension of that already existing police treatment. The modern backlash to the War on Drugs is just what happens when that "War" spilled out of poor black neighborhoods and started affecting middle class college kids from "good" families. No one was pushing for lighter sentences and legalization when the tactics stayed targeted on violent inner cities.

 

[Mike]

There's a problem with police conduct in America. It isn't every police department (usually just the bigger cities), and while it might disproportionately affect the black community, even bringing up a case where police misconduct resulted in the death of a white person is in the eyes of many BLM supporters an attempt at trying to divert the movement.

Yeah, if we're only supposed to care when the victim is black, I want no part in that.

The link JVS posted had some very reasonable proposals. Yet it doesn't coalesce with the bullshit of the protesters on the ground.


Even if the message is reasonable, a bunch of supporters acting like shitheads is going to make anyone apprehensive of taking them seriously.

Well yeah BLM has a point but the way they go about presenting their message is stupid and obnoxious. I've been on record saying that over and over. It doesn't take away that they do have a point though ,they're just too angry and disorganized to go anywhere ith it.

 

[VivaRevolution]

They are defining the problem correctly. The over aggressive policing of black communities goes back well before the War on Drugs. The police were frequently a tool of segregationists used to threatening black communities that tried to raise their claims for equal treatment.

The War on Drugs was nothing more than an extension of that already existing police treatment. The modern backlash to the War on Drugs is just what happens when that "War" spilled out of poor black neighborhoods and started affecting middle class college kids from "good" families. No one was pushing for lighter sentences and legalization when the tactics stayed targeted on violent inner cities.

If they are defining the problem correctly, then what is the solution?

See the way I define the problem in the Jim Crow war on drugs leading to increased interactions in the black community with police, therefor leading to the greater effect on the black community of the militarization of police, has a solution.

Where is the solution to police are racist?

 

[HunterSdVa29]

i have pretty much only black friends, and i only ever see them discuss it on FB or online. That may be b/c i'm white, so maybe they don't feel like talking about that when they come over. I have, however, seen some relatively egregious posts on line by these same people, to which i'm always excluded from the 'whites' they're talking about haha

but no, the problems are definitely real and pretty pervasive (especially depending on your region of the US), but the movement itself isn't all around us. It's nowhere near comparative to say the Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s..

I see much more pro gay/LBGT stuff IRL than i do BLM, just saying. Then again, i am in SoCal

 

[ralphc1]

BLM supporters feel that black people shouldn't have to obey a lawful order given by a law enforcement officer. They feel that police should just let black people go if they don't want to be questioned or taken into custody. A black person wandering around someones back yard in the dark shouldn't be confronted. Police are supposed to be able to tell if a person is armed without searching them.

One of the few black people I know says if a black teenager is in his backyard after dark, he's getting shot.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

and maybe it's just me b/c i hang out with lots of black people, but literally nobody i know in my age group likes/trusts cops nor disbelieved all the stories of police brutality. People likely didn't think about it nor realize it till the stats from Ferguson came out, but it's been obvious as long as i've been alive that cops are used almost exclusively to gain revenue for the city. How many times do you see a cop that isn't in his car parked, or doing traffic duties? I'm sure big cities still have 'beats' and what have you, but it appears that the sole purpose of cops is to pull people over and give them tickets. Ipso facto, of course people don't like them, they don't generally help anybody (no offense), obviously they do IRL but people don't see that. Surely some wife is being beat, kids being abused/neglected, and a litany of other issues that would actually help the public or individuals than traffic duty, by being actively stomped out.

 

[in the]

Well yeah BLM has a point but the way they go about presenting their message is stupid and obnoxious. I've been on record saying that over and over. It doesn't take away that they do have a point though ,they're just too angry and disorganized to go anywhere ith it.

They've said and done so much stupid shit since their inception that it's almost as if agent provocateurs have infiltrated the movement and diverted it into doing stupid shit that would cause enough substantial blowback as to alienate anyone with an IQ over 12.

Given that there's no proof of agent provocateurs, the most reasonable explanation is that while they may have some good viewpoints, some of their messages are driven and brought into action by complete retards.

 

[VivaRevolution]

BLM supporters feel that black people shouldn't have to obey a lawful order given by a law enforcement officer. They feel that police should just let black people go if they don't want to be questioned or taken into custody. A black person wandering around someones back yard in the dark shouldn't be confronted. Police are supposed to be able to tell if a person is armed without searching them.

One of the few black people I know says if a black teenager is in his backyard after dark, he's getting shot.

I think that the black community believes that punishment for disobeying a lawful order, should be prison and a felony, not execution by cop, which I tend to agree with.

 

[Forkfoot]

I'm not a victim, but for the record I have no problem with people who are victims saying so. Victimhood is a perfectly legitimate concept that exists for a reason. It's on police forms for a reason. I'm not going to pretend "victim" is a pejorative just because some nerds on 4chan ruled that that's how internet culture works.

 

[panamaican]

If they are defining the problem correctly, then what is the solution?

See the way I define the problem in the Jim Crow war on drugs leading to increased interactions in the black community with police, therefor leading to the greater effect on the black community of the militarization of police, has a solution.

Where is the solution to police are racist?

That's why I said it's an awareness movement. Some problems don't have clear cut solutions. Rather they are solved by making the public aware of the problem and relying on social pressure to gradually install change. Which is how most social movements work. Even when people spend hours attacking BLM, they are furthering the movement by spreading awareness. The result? People start asking what is this all about and if even a few influential people decide that the movement is valid then the movement is successful.

The focus on the War on Drugs is focus on recent events at the expense of history. The War on Drugs started in the 1980's. The type of police treatment BLM is concerned about traces back to post-Civil War Era America and has been pervasive from then until now. Just for illumination - the police were the one's tasked with enforcing segregation laws. They were the ones whose job required them to find black people doing things that only white people were allowed to do and then punishing the black people for doing so. I always winder what crime prevention looks like when it's a crime to act as the equal of other citizens. Well, the police had to figure that out and put it into place. How do you convince a community that it can't ride in the front of a bus or drink from a water fountain? To change behavior that completely probably requires some level of intimidation and aggression.

So, even though affecting the War on Drugs is superficially positive, it wouldn't change how police treat black communities because that treatment preceded the War on Drugs...it wasn't created by the War on Drugs.

 

[in the]

I'm not a victim, but for the record I have no problem with people who are victims saying so. Victimhood is a perfectly legitimate concept that exists for a reason. It's on police forms for a reason. I'm not going to pretend "victim" is a pejorative just because some nerds on 4chan ruled that that's how internet culture works.

The police are victims. #bluelivesmatter

Don't you dare fucking question that or you're an autistic 4chan retard.

 

[VivaRevolution]

That's why I said it's an awareness movement. Some problems don't have clear cut solutions. Rather they are solved by making the public aware of the problem and relying on social pressure to gradually install change. Which is how most social movements work. Even when people spend hours attacking BLM, they are furthering the movement by spreading awareness. The result? People start asking what is this all about and if even a few influential people decide that the movement is valid then the movement is successful.

The focus on the War on Drugs is focus on recent events at the expense of history. The War on Drugs started in the 1980's. The type of police treatment BLM is concerned about traces back to post-Civil War Era America and has been pervasive from then until now. Just for illumination - the police were the one's tasked with enforcing segregation laws. They were the ones whose job required them to find black people doing things that only white people were allowed to do and then punishing the black people for doing so. I always winder what crime prevention looks like when it's a crime to act as the equal of other citizens. Well, the police had to figure that out and put it into place. How do you convince a community that it can't ride in the front of a bus or drink from a water fountain? To change behavior that completely probably requires some level of intimidation and aggression.

So, even though affecting the War on Drugs is superficially positive, it wouldn't change how police treat black communities because that treatment preceded the War on Drugs...it wasn't created by the War on Drugs.

Yeah, and I will point you to all kinds of numbers showing the black community was better off in the 60's-70's.

Incarceration rates, unemployment rates, single parent homes, black on black crime, all better statistically before the Jim Crow war on drugs.

You can point to this problem being a long lasting one. I don't dispute this. What I will dispute is if the causes for the destruction of the black community in the last 30 years, is the same cause as you point to. I do not believe that it is.

 

[Forkfoot]

The police are victims. #bluelivesmatter.

Of course police are victims sometimes. Who could possibly dispute that?