Welcome


Thank you for visiting our new forum! To start posting again please follow the link below to create a new password. First time forum users please follow the link to register. CFI thanks you for continuing the discussion on evidence-based thinking and humanist values.

“Black Lives Matter”


Forums Forums Politics and Social Issues “Black Lives Matter”

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 319 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #214424
    @cuthbertj
    Participant

    I think that the Black Lives Matter movement is extraordinarily important, but its proponents are tactical idiots if they are going to, so vehemently, go after their strongest potential allies rather than their strongest obvious opponents.

    Couldn’t agree more. Disrupting Bernie, being so disrespectful to someone who has been so pro-their cause, unfortunately makes them look stupid. Conservatives eat that stuff up, turn to each other and say “told you so”.

    #214426
    @cuthbertj
    Participant

    I heard a statistic this morning: 24 unarmed young black men have been shot to death by white cops this year. Ok, that’s horrible, and that’s the point that was being made. BUT there’s another part to this that I haven’t heard, and I’d like to know: what are the other numbers? # of unarmed white young men shot to death by black cops, # UYMB shot by black cops, #UY white men shot to death by white cops. Does anyone know those statistics? Let’s say those other three stats were 0, THEN there’s a huge problem. But what about if those others weren’t 0? What would we say if the stats showed 24 young white unarmed men were shot dead by white cops? Black cops? See, until we get those stats it’s very easy to think the media is just playing up an angle, versus going after the truth. So anyone have those stats? I wouldn’t know where to start.

    #214428
    @lausten
    Keymaster

    I think that the Black Lives Matter movement is extraordinarily important, but its proponents are tactical idiots if they are going to, so vehemently, go after their strongest potential allies rather than their strongest obvious opponents.

    Couldn’t agree more. Disrupting Bernie, being so disrespectful to someone who has been so pro-their cause, unfortunately makes them look stupid. Conservatives eat that stuff up, turn to each other and say “told you so”.
    Besides that being a statement based on almost no data, I think we should give this a little time, so we can find out who these two women were and what they were up to.]

    #214429
    @timb
    Participant

    I heard a statistic this morning: 24 unarmed young black men have been shot to death by white cops this year. Ok, that’s horrible, and that’s the point that was being made. BUT there’s another part to this that I haven’t heard, and I’d like to know: what are the other numbers? # of unarmed white young men shot to death by black cops, # UYMB shot by black cops, #UY white men shot to death by white cops. Does anyone know those statistics? Let’s say those other three stats were 0, THEN there’s a huge problem. But what about if those others weren’t 0? What would we say if the stats showed 24 young white unarmed men were shot dead by white cops? Black cops? See, until we get those stats it’s very easy to think the media is just playing up an angle, versus going after the truth. So anyone have those stats? I wouldn’t know where to start.

    http://killedbypolice.net/
    http://killedbypolice.net/
    This site appears to stay up to date in listing everyone, that they can discover, who has died in an interaction with the police. You could glean out the data that you want by clicking on each case and figuring out the race of the departed, and whether he allegedly was armed or not. I don’t think you would consistently find the race of the policemen involved, however.
    But good luck if you make the effort. There are well over 100 people killed by police per month.

    #214431
    @timb
    Participant

    I think that the Black Lives Matter movement is extraordinarily important, but its proponents are tactical idiots if they are going to, so vehemently, go after their strongest potential allies rather than their strongest obvious opponents.

    Couldn’t agree more. Disrupting Bernie, being so disrespectful to someone who has been so pro-their cause, unfortunately makes them look stupid. Conservatives eat that stuff up, turn to each other and say “told you so”.
    Besides that being a statement based on almost no data, I think we should give this a little time, so we can find out who these two women were and what they were up to.]
    Thanks for the link. That is interesting. My view is that If the perpetrators against Bernie are not actually representatives (as they portrayed themselves to be) of the BLM movement, then the BLM movement should make that known. If they are Sarah Palin Supporters and Right wing Christian nuts who also happen to be rabid supporters of the BLM movement, the BLM movement should get them under control, because they are not, IMO, doing anything productive to advocate for their cause.
    And Lausten, (re: your “no data” statement) do you ever have an opinion or perspective on anything, that you express, without waiting for a series of rigorous and replicated scientific studies to support it? If not, we will be waiting a long time for your perspectives and opinions. And if the day does come, I expect that the BLM movement will have come and gone, and will be a footnote in history, by then. If we always demand more data and more studies before we say or do anything, about anything, then we will never say or do anything, except wait for more data and studies.

    #214451
    @lausten
    Keymaster

    And Lausten, (re: your “no data” statement) do you ever have an opinion or perspective on anything, that you express, without waiting for a series of rigorous and replicated scientific studies to support it? If not, we will be waiting a long time for your perspectives and opinions. And if the day does come, I expect that the BLM movement will have come and gone, and will be a footnote in history, by then. If we always demand more data and more studies before we say or do anything, about anything, then we will never say or do anything, except wait for more data and studies.

    How can I have an opinion without data? Obviously it would be an uninformed opinion. It should also be obvious that BLM has been active for a year and has a ton of data showing if is a movement with integrity and results. When I said “no data”, I meant no data supporting it AND data countering it.
    Oh, and I just saw this. Really people, two days, you couldn’t wait two days when immediately there were questions about these two.] Like the article says, BLM is a “loosely organized” group. If you didn’t know that, then you didn’t know much about BLM and should not have been expressing an opinion on it.

    #214464
    @timb
    Participant

    And Lausten, (re: your “no data” statement) do you ever have an opinion or perspective on anything, that you express, without waiting for a series of rigorous and replicated scientific studies to support it? If not, we will be waiting a long time for your perspectives and opinions. And if the day does come, I expect that the BLM movement will have come and gone, and will be a footnote in history, by then. If we always demand more data and more studies before we say or do anything, about anything, then we will never say or do anything, except wait for more data and studies.

    How can I have an opinion without data? Obviously it would be an uninformed opinion. It should also be obvious that BLM has been active for a year and has a ton of data showing if is a movement with integrity and results. When I said “no data”, I meant no data supporting it AND data countering it.
    Oh, and I just saw this. Really people, two days, you couldn’t wait two days when immediately there were questions about these two.] Like the article says, BLM is a “loosely organized” group. If you didn’t know that, then you didn’t know much about BLM and should not have been expressing an opinion on it.
    OK, again thanks for the link. Here’s another “data” point. I saw Alicia Garza, who was presented as co-founder of BLM, being interviewed and asked specifically about the 2 girls and the Bernie incident. Her response was something to the effect that power is never relinquished without demand. She spoke about the bravery of young people in the movement and their willingness to be put themselves forward. While I do not disagree with this, she made no hint of an apology or that one was due, for this particular incident.
    The BLM is an evolving movement. If everyone fails to discuss it until it fizzles out, or until it gets properly organized, it is likely to fade from the public consciousness all too soon. Should you have waited to express your inference/opinion: that I should not express an opinion because I don’t know enough? I don’t think so. I think your opinion is worth presenting now, not two days rom now.
    But back to my opinion. The BLM movement should get more organized, if being “loosely organized” leads to attacks (that not only look ridiculous) but may alienate their best allies (progressives) and which interferes with the Presidential campaign of the one man who would most likely do the most for their cause, were he elected.
    I am not critical of them because I want them to fail. I am critical of them because I want them to succeed.

    #214474
    @lausten
    Keymaster

    I am not critical of them because I want them to fail. I am critical of them because I want them to succeed.

    I appreciate that. I’m not going to go back and trace exactly what you said when. My comments were made to the thread as a whole and I’ll stick with them. There is not general “wait two days” rule. The action of the two women was unusual, it happened on a weekend when even well organized groups might not be around to answer the phone, and there were questions about them almost immediately. That adds up to a reason to be cautious in judgment.

    #214533
    @timb
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    #214535
    @cuthbertj
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.

    #214543
    @timb
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.
    Your reaction here, is my initial reaction, also. But from the BLM movement’s perspective, they did the right thing, attacking Bernie. From interviews I have seen of BLM spokespersons, they appear to believe that they must demand that more be voiced in the presentation of their issues. And I can see their point. Also we see the effect: that Bernie immediately hired a BLM person to add to his campaign.
    Still, I share your concern about them projecting a reverse racism in this process, which will not be easily accepted by their non-black allies or potential non-black allies. And such would likely serve to further entrench and even motivate their opponents.
    So I still think it was a mistake for the BLM people to be so publicly disrespectful of Bernie and to accuse the crowd of being racist for responding negatively when they did so. If it had been white people storming the stage and pushing Bernie aside, to have their say, and to force Bernie to talk about, let’s say AGW, I think that the crowd would have reacted just as vehemently.

    #214556
    @cuthbertj
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.
    Your reaction here, is my initial reaction, also. But from the BLM movement’s perspective, they did the right thing, attacking Bernie. From interviews I have seen of BLM spokespersons, they appear to believe that they must demand that more be voiced in the presentation of their issues. And I can see their point. Also we see the effect: that Bernie immediately hired a BLM person to add to his campaign.
    Still, I share your concern about them projecting a reverse racism in this process, which will not be easily accepted by their non-black allies or potential non-black allies. And such would likely serve to further entrench and even motivate their opponents.
    So I still think it was a mistake for the BLM people to be so publicly disrespectful of Bernie and to accuse the crowd of being racist for responding negatively when they did so. If it had been white people storming the stage and pushing Bernie aside, to have their say, and to force Bernie to talk about, let’s say AGW, I think that the crowd would have reacted just as vehemently.Unfortunately, Bernie hiring an african american will be perceived as “giving in to demands” which in turn creates resentment that wasn’t otherwise there.

    #214577
    @timb
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.
    Your reaction here, is my initial reaction, also. But from the BLM movement’s perspective, they did the right thing, attacking Bernie. From interviews I have seen of BLM spokespersons, they appear to believe that they must demand that more be voiced in the presentation of their issues. And I can see their point. Also we see the effect: that Bernie immediately hired a BLM person to add to his campaign.
    Still, I share your concern about them projecting a reverse racism in this process, which will not be easily accepted by their non-black allies or potential non-black allies. And such would likely serve to further entrench and even motivate their opponents.
    So I still think it was a mistake for the BLM people to be so publicly disrespectful of Bernie and to accuse the crowd of being racist for responding negatively when they did so. If it had been white people storming the stage and pushing Bernie aside, to have their say, and to force Bernie to talk about, let’s say AGW, I think that the crowd would have reacted just as vehemently.Unfortunately, Bernie hiring an african american will be perceived as “giving in to demands” which in turn creates resentment that wasn’t otherwise there.
    Bernie will be perceived as weak by Trump and those of his ilk. But not so much by thinking Americans.
    Unless you measure a man’s strength by whether he can throw a stronger punch, or lift the heaviest weights, Bernie Sanders is not weak. He has demonstrated a strength of character in an almost singled minded, consistent, and persistent dedication to his beliefs and ideals for decades.

    #214579
    @mriana
    Keymaster

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.
    Your reaction here, is my initial reaction, also. But from the BLM movement’s perspective, they did the right thing, attacking Bernie. From interviews I have seen of BLM spokespersons, they appear to believe that they must demand that more be voiced in the presentation of their issues. And I can see their point. Also we see the effect: that Bernie immediately hired a BLM person to add to his campaign.
    Still, I share your concern about them projecting a reverse racism in this process, which will not be easily accepted by their non-black allies or potential non-black allies. And such would likely serve to further entrench and even motivate their opponents.
    So I still think it was a mistake for the BLM people to be so publicly disrespectful of Bernie and to accuse the crowd of being racist for responding negatively when they did so. If it had been white people storming the stage and pushing Bernie aside, to have their say, and to force Bernie to talk about, let’s say AGW, I think that the crowd would have reacted just as vehemently.Unfortunately, Bernie hiring an african american will be perceived as “giving in to demands” which in turn creates resentment that wasn’t otherwise there.
    Bernie will be perceived as weak by Trump and those of his ilk. But not so much by thinking Americans.
    Unless you measure a man’s strength by whether he can throw a stronger punch, or lift the heaviest weights, Bernie Sanders is not weak. He has demonstrated a strength of character in an almost singled minded, consistent, and persistent dedication to his beliefs and ideals for decades.
    Then in the long run, Bernie could be stronger for it.

    #214581
    @timb
    Participant

    I’ve been watching the BLM reps who have been interviewed on news shows. They are consistently unapologetic about going after Bernie the way they did in that event. They believe that it is an effective strategy to go after targets whose views are already closer to their own, but not all the way there. Maybe so. But I still think that it is potentially self defeating if you wind up making your best potential allies look bad, while letting your real opponents skate.

    Short of an all black crowd, Bernie’s crowds are probably as close as you’d come to 100% sympathy/agreement with the Black Lives Matter cause. And these idiots ended up making THAT audience mad at them and yelling at them. If that ain’t stupid I don’t know what is. And worse yet, an african american commentator on MSNBC drew the conclusion that the white crowd yelling at them was an indication of the CROWD’s racism. Seriously? It never occurred to this pundit that maybe the disrupters were being disrespectful. Now THAT’S racist…whitey had to be showing their racism, not their anger at disrespect.
    Your reaction here, is my initial reaction, also. But from the BLM movement’s perspective, they did the right thing, attacking Bernie. From interviews I have seen of BLM spokespersons, they appear to believe that they must demand that more be voiced in the presentation of their issues. And I can see their point. Also we see the effect: that Bernie immediately hired a BLM person to add to his campaign.
    Still, I share your concern about them projecting a reverse racism in this process, which will not be easily accepted by their non-black allies or potential non-black allies. And such would likely serve to further entrench and even motivate their opponents.
    So I still think it was a mistake for the BLM people to be so publicly disrespectful of Bernie and to accuse the crowd of being racist for responding negatively when they did so. If it had been white people storming the stage and pushing Bernie aside, to have their say, and to force Bernie to talk about, let’s say AGW, I think that the crowd would have reacted just as vehemently.Unfortunately, Bernie hiring an african american will be perceived as “giving in to demands” which in turn creates resentment that wasn’t otherwise there.
    Bernie will be perceived as weak by Trump and those of his ilk. But not so much by thinking Americans.
    Unless you measure a man’s strength by whether he can throw a stronger punch, or lift the heaviest weights, Bernie Sanders is not weak. He has demonstrated a strength of character in an almost singled minded, consistent, and persistent dedication to his beliefs and ideals for decades.
    Then in the long run, Bernie could be stronger for it.
    One would hope so. It sort of depends on the ratio of thinking vs. non-thinking Americans and the ratio of Americans who are willing to admit and confront the existence and effects of institutionalized racism vs. those who aren’t.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 319 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.