#BLM (Black Lives Matter) Formalizes its Political Demands

[Jack V Savage]

The overwhelming majority of those people who "support" the BLM movement have never read these demands and are clueless to this list.

I hadn't read that list, but I read this one:

http://www.joincampaignzero.org/#vision

And it is eminently reasonable.

And that brings up an important point. The "movement" is basically a hashtag with lots of unrelated individuals and groups--some with very good ideas, some with very bad ones, and everything in between. I would say that there is a legitimate problem with the way the justice system treats blacks in America, and that good, thoughtful solutions have been offered by some in the movement. To that extent, I'm a supporter, but it doesn't mean that I own or support every nutjob who uses the hashtag or holds up a sign. I'd think that the distinction would be pretty easily understandable, but emotions run really high on the issue of race.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

also, where is this money supposed to come from? I hope not tax revenue, which I'm assuming it is...

which means that immigrant families that came here recently, will be effectively 'punished' for ish they weren't even remotely present or responsible for? I mean none of us were present, but if your family wasn't even in the US at the time....

wait, what

 

[panamaican]

I have to disagree with this (respectively) Pan.

I don’t think anyone, from any nationality; political background dismissed the “underlying message of “black lives mattering.” Of course they matter. I think we all acknowledge that.

And #BLM has deserved a great deal of ire it has received.

Their disruptive methods, (blocking traffic, disrupting Christmas tree lightings at public parks) some of the racist comments by their leaders, what they did to Bernie Sanders, and making martyrs out of pieces of shit like Mike Brown and Mario Woods.

And looking at these list of demands…I just gotta say, “what in the fuck? “ the world doesn’t owe you shit. Reparations? Economic reparations, education reparations, criminal justice reparations?

Entirely unrealistic and ridiculous.

I respectfully disagree. The entire premise of the ALM response was predicated on challenging the foundational position that "black lives matter" by saying "no, black lives do not matter in the way that you say they do. All Lives is what you should be saying." It's a direct challenge to their foundation concept.

The bad acts of BLM should have ended the movement on their own. But for the method of challenge, they would have. But instead, the method of challenge created 2 different points of debate. One point of debate can quickly fade. 2 points extend the conversation.

To make a comparison to OWS, it would be like saying - "You can't say "Occupy Wall Street, say Occupy All Streets." Then the OWS people would have gained another debate point - the debate about whether or not Wall Street is an appropriate focus for their movement. That would have strengthened their cause. People who might not have felt strongly about the 99% vs. 1% debate but did think that Wall Street needed to be reined in would have joined into the debate on the Wall Street issue.

A similar thing happened to BLM. The debate changed from simply being about police engagement in the black community to whether or not "black lives" deserved to be singled out for a movement at all. If it stayed about police engagement then the bad acts of BLM supporters would have tanked their own movement. But once it became about whether or not "black lives" should be said then they emboldened a completely different debate.

 

[nixkid]

80% of it sounds like something you'd read in Bernie Sander's platform (just take out the reparations bit and the political power part and some of the community control part). The Invest-Divest and Economic Justice parts are pretty much classic Bernie. Though I'm sure people are much more afraid (and therefore much more pissed off) about this because, you know, some black people said it.

 

[nixkid]

which means that immigrant families that came here recently, will be effectively 'punished' for ish they weren't even remotely present or responsible for? I mean none of us were present, but if your family wasn't even in the US at the time....

If an immigrant moves to America today with his family, does he have to pay for the debt created by, say, the Iraq War which happened before he and his family entered the US? Yes? Same thing.

 

[Madmick]

well, there's that...while i do vaguely remember this happening now that you posted this, i completely forgot. which is part of the problem with just a written apology. nothing says sorry about all that oppression like cash, and a settlement would "show" that the country has a vested interest in AA community. it will never happen so i'll just shut up now.

They've already been getting that for half a century in the form of mass entitlement programs and the scaled income tax. That doesn't mention all the charities and other initiatives aimed at black youths and inner cities. These are (mostly) colorblind policies, and thus are much more sensible and robust for assisting a long-term recovery.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

that's not the issue people will likely have

there's a massive, absurd jump in logic from 'equal economic opportunity' to letting a whole specific race get free schooling, erased criminal records, changing our entire criminal justice system and how it works, the removal of student loan debt (what about grants tho, which economically disadvantaged people would receive....), etc....

Tabula Rasa this is not

 

[El anciano]

What makes them special?

Not all blacks were slaves. Some were even slavers.



How does the IRS determine whos eligible for the break and who isn't? Many white people have a few drops of African blood in them, and most blacks are have some European blood in them.

And do you hike taxes on rich black people as well, or will the be exempt?

I edited the last part in my last post. Yes rich African Americans would be exempt. Nobody is soecial. But they are not lesser people as they have always been treated. Because racism has always existed I think all African Americans should get it regardless of time in country.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

If an immigrant moves to America today with his family, does he have to pay for the debt created by, say, the Iraq War which happened before he and his family entered the US? Yes? Same thing.

I guess, but that debt is already accounted for in the yearly budget

Reperations, and and the other costly things they're asking for, ARE NOT....which means something is being drastically, majorly cut or taxes will be raised.....

The Iraq war was also a few years ago, NOT OVER ONE HUNDRED

 

[SomebodyElse]

I edited the last part in my last post. Yes rich African Americans would be exempt. Nobody is soecial. But they are not lesser people as they have always been treated. Because racism has always existed I think all African Americans should get it regardless of time in country.

So how do you determine who is black?

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

Slavery was never gonna stop in this country. Be realistic. Segregation was never gonna end in this country. Be realistic. African Americans are never going to get justice through reparations. Be realistic. See how that works? We cannot just accept things as they are just because that is the way they are

These things are not going to happen because they go against big business and banks.

Slavery was only supported by southern hicks not the northern elites.

They want to break the big banks and end super PACs, so they are going against both parties which are supported by banks and big businesses, they are going to lose.

 

[Rick Sanchez]

BLM = Occupy wall st with guns and riots

 

[nixkid]

that's not the issue people will likely have

there's a massive, absurd jump in logic from 'equal economic opportunity' to letting a whole specific race get free schooling, erased criminal records, changing our entire criminal justice system and how it works, the removal of student loan debt (what about grants tho, which economically disadvantaged people would receive....), etc....

Tabula Rasa this is not

A lot of it isn't specific to black people. For instance, when they call for an end to TPP, they aren't arguing for a system where TPP would apply only to non-blacks (obviously because such a thing wouldn't be possible). No TPP means no TPP. The free school part seems racially-agnostic. They called for a "constitutional right" to a fully funded education so I doubt they are advocating for a "only black people get free education" constitutional amendment. Most of their economic justice, invest-divest, and community control positions would help all communities. The War on Drugs would mostly benefit black communities because black communities are most often targets in the drug war but it would also help other communities that affected by it as well.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

free education AND forgival of student loans?

ahhh, so that's why that demographic attends college at a higher rate yet graduates at a lower rate....

what about the Social Welfare assistance afforded single mothers now that attend school in lieu of work requirements (and what do you know, hardly graduate)? if school is free, they can't mooch off the system anymore?

Forgival

 

[HunterSdVa29]

A lot of it isn't specific to black people. For instance, when they call for an end to TPP, they aren't arguing for a system where TPP would apply only to non-blacks (obviously because such a thing wouldn't be possible). No TPP means no TPP. The free school part seems racially-agnostic. They called for a "constitutional right" to a fully funded education so I doubt they are advocating for a "only black people get free education" constitutional amendment. Most of their economic justice, invest-divest, and community control positions would help all communities. The War on Drugs would mostly benefit black communities because black communities are most often targets in the drug war but it would also help other communities that affected by it as well.

you are correct in that, which is partly what makes it so odd....

its like they included those to draw outside support, forgetting that the other things they're asking for (communal of drug war sentences, no bail, etc...) likely will not...

 

[Madmick]

Your first paragraph demonstrates my point more effectively than I could have done.

No, it demonstrated my point, and that's why you're counter-punching with this weakass shit. If the longevity of a movement is testament to its validity, then the KKK has #BLM beat by 158 years.

Herpaderp. Yeah, try backing away from your race bias and putting on your thinking cap.

Your second paragraph isn't something I said, I never said the movement failed, I said it faded out. Your argument that it was reborn in some more effective fashion is exactly what I said is the difference between how OWS was challenged and how BLM was challenged. OWS wasn't reborn, it was coopted by a larger organization and now all of those OWS'ers have no movement but they're convinced they're accomplishing something. Bernie? How's that nomination working out for them?

Bernie lost, but he killed the TPP and Citizens United as part of Hillary's platform. She actually has friends inside the system of Wall Street, and she actually wields control over her party as a whole, which is what #Bernieorbust types incessantly whine about, but it's precisely because of these truths she stands a much better chance of achieving reform the way reform-- not revolution-- has always been most effectively achieved: from within the systems.

Hence the Trump comparison. The RNC never coopted Trump's movement...and he won his nomination. BEcause they couldn't fold his agenda into their larger umbrella and then disperse the effectiveness that comes from a united position.

The Tea Party was coopted into the RNC and their entire no tax plan has largely been subsumed by the RNC's larger anti-Democrat position. The Tea Party actually had a plan and a position, now they don't even really exist.

The people that dislike BLM but challenge it by arguing that the movement's issues aren't even real are the actual dummies. They don't understand how they breathe life into movements in this fashion. I posted earlier what my original opinion on BLM is, I thought it would be gone by now. But then I see how the idiots challenge it and I can see why it survived. Look no further than your first paragraph for why this movement has more life than it should.

Until you realize that the entire reason that Trump is almost achieving a coup of the entire 6th party system wherein he gains full control without needing to seek any approval from party politicians is being driven by absurdly racist movements like #BLM. The "real dummies" are the ones who don't realize the Democrats wrangled the black vote 20 years ago, and now don't have to change one brick in their sprawling platform to keep that vote. They suck up 90% of the black vote with mere posturing, now. What has Hillary said she will do for #BLM? She walks them out on the stage and pays tribute to them, shines their asses real good, but she's going to put their mess back in a box the moment she carries the vote.

The Democrats have an entire demographic drinking out of the palms of their hands, and what does that demographic have to show for it? Bernie's base radically altered her platform; sealed her legacy in history as the consummate populist flip-flopper. Meanwhile I guess you forgot this headline:
There Goes the Firewall: Hillary Clinton’s Response to BLM May Have Cost Her The Election

“I’m not a superpredator!” Ashley Williams, a young Black Lives Matter protester told Democratic presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton—her confidence belied by a slight quiver in her voice.

Even when heckled by the mostly white crowd at a $500-per-plate campaign fundraiser dinner in conservative South Carolina, Williams held her ground. She faced down an evasive Clinton, demanding an explanation for racist remarks the former First Lady made in 1996, where she referred to inner-city, black youth as “super-predators” with “no conscience” and “no empathy.” “We need to bring them to heel” she explained.

At the time, Clinton was touting her husband’s “tough on crime” policies—specifically the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994—which imposed harsh punishments on a variety of nonviolent offenses, and is widely accepted as a driving force (though not the only force) behind the explosion of incarceration over the next decade. Black America was hit particularly hard.

After a tense confrontation, Clinton’s security detail physically removed the young woman who had paid $500 to deliver her message.

After she was gone, a visibly annoyed Clinton, seemingly unable to stop herself, turned to the crowd and said “Back to the issues…” not realizing she was on camera. She could not have made a more tone-deaf statement, especially given the name of movement she had just been confronted by.

More recently:
Black Lives Matter supporters march against Hillary Clinton: ‘Hard to trust’
Who cares if they're right? Because, LOL, yeah, I'm sure she's really shaking in her boots they'll vote for Trump. At worst, a fraction of black voters will stay home on election day.

 

[klnOmega]

I edited the last part in my last post. Yes rich African Americans would be exempt.

Why are rich African Americans exempt?

Nobody is soecial. But they are not lesser people as they have always been treated.
Because racism has always existed I think all African Americans should get it regardless of time in country.

Some black people are "lesser" and have always been treated. Not all. One of my classmates is a first generation Nigerian immigrant. His family is rich as fuck. Does he get reparations also, even those his family was a world away during slavery and the civil rights era?

 

[thebluerider]

They've already been getting that for half a century in the form of mass entitlement programs and the scaled income tax. That doesn't mention all the charities and other initiatives aimed at black youths and inner cities. These are (mostly) colorblind policies, and thus are much more sensible and robust for assisting a long-term recovery.

reparations are an emotional play, imo, but done for a logical reason. blacks in the US continue to feel disenfranchised, and that has to end before the long hard road of rebuilding their communities can happen. reparations would demonstrate that the country as a whole is serious about helping, even tho reparations would do very little to materially help the community. as a symbolic gesture, i think it should be done. i realize that you will probably think a trillion dollar or w/e symbolic gesture is crazy stupid, and I will not argue that you are wrong to think that.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

also, how do you 'end a war' on black immigrants, when Nigerian immigrants are the literal most successful demographic of our society, aren't they?

you can't make this shit up

 

[nixkid]

I guess, but that debt is already accounted for in the yearly budget

Reperations, and and the other costly things they're asking for, ARE NOT....which means something is being drastically, majorly cut or taxes will be raised.....

The Iraq war was also a few years ago, NOT OVER ONE HUNDRED

Paying reparations is an action by the state to correct wrong doing that were carried out or supported by the state. Its not about any particular individual tax payer paying because they are somehow responsible. Tax payers are playing because the state is responsible and tax payers fund the state. Black tax payers (including those descendant from American slaves) should also pay for reparations. And if the reparations were means tested (which could be a real possibility) many of those black tax payers would not see any benefit from reparations.