The Black Lives Matters thread.

[yummybrownfox]

The man on my avatar is Malik Obama, President Barack Obama's brother. One week after Obama stated his support for Hillary, his brother declared his support for Donald Trump explaining that Hillary is a crook and Trump speaks from the heart. He did some PR moves too, giving interviews about it to American media. A part of me wants to believe that he is being a proxy for President Barack Obama's true feelings on the matter since the fact that he pretty much hates Hillary's guts is well known. He cant speak against her himself because of his party, but his brother can. I found it funny and a smart move so I made it my avatar.

But all you see in my avatar is a black man. And then you call ME a racist.

First of all, I wasn't speaking to YOU. And I'm well aware of who the man in your avatar is...

Funny. I don't remember calling you a racist in my previous post, though it has crossed my mind. Are you saying you're not?

 

[Zoomer]

It is negated because the fact that he is black didn't factor in on the decision of me using him as an avatar. He could be whiter than a nun's buttcheek and I would use him the same because what matters is who he is (Incument democrat president's brother) and who he is supporting (the opposite party). The fact that he is black has absolutely nothing to do with it. And when you see me use a black person as an avatar and the only explanation you can come up with is that I am using him because of the color of his skin, you are denying him his identity. The person who is being a racist is you for thinking the only motive one can choose a black person as an avatar is because he is black. It is pretty funny actually how the snake eats it's tail when it comes to racism. The fact that @Songbird_Shelly and the other dude are so hypersensitive about their race makes them interpret anything having to do with blacks as an act of racism. I wonder with how many things they do the same.

So wait... a presidents brother is incapable of having his own political opinion, he must be representing the Presidents true opinion.

Socialism is only an euphemism for communism. The main difference between the two is that communism is achieved by a violent overtake of the country through arms (Cuba) while socialism is achieved through democracy (Venezuela). In communism measures are imposed over the people by the dictator. In socialism the same measures are achieved progressively through reforms of the system. Socialists always abuse the system to achieve them, of course, and the late stages of socialism involve the dismantlement of the very system that allowed them to exist so that they can remain forever in power, but I digress. The fact is the endgame for communism and socialism is exactly the same.

Erm, where do you learn your politics? The Political School of ignorance and idiocy? I suggest you hit the books and read up on a subject instead of making it up as you go along to fit your personal desired narrative.

 

[Gen]

So wait... a presidents brother is incapable of having his own political opinion, he must be representing the Presidents true opinion.



Erm, where do you learn your politics? The Political School of ignorance and idiocy? I suggest you hit the books and read up on a subject instead of making it up as you go along to fit your personal desired narrative.

I disagree with @supermila on heaps of things and I agree with your first point, but essentially saying "lol u dumb" without adding anything to counter what she's saying is kind of pointless and seems more like you're trying to look superior than actually make a point. I don't know much at all about what she's talking about but if you have links or info to counter it, I'm sure it would benefit lots of us to see it rather than just snarkiness.

 

[Mila_]

So wait... a presidents brother is incapable of having his own political opinion, he must be representing the Presidents true opinion.

Erm, where do you learn your politics? The Political School of ignorance and idiocy? I suggest you hit the books and read up on a subject instead of making it up as you go along to fit your personal desired narrative.

Don't get your panties in a twist. If he supports Trump for himself or not is kind of irrelevant, I just thought him speaking as Obama's proxy was a plausible theory that would add an additional layer of creamy delight to this topkek of a TMZ story.

 

[Zoomer]

I disagree with @supermila on heaps of things and I agree with your first point, but essentially saying "lol u dumb" without adding anything to counter what she's saying is kind of pointless and seems more like you're trying to look superior than actually make a point. I don't know much at all about what she's talking about but if you have links or info to counter it, I'm sure it would benefit lots of us to see it rather than just snarkiness.

So if someone said 1 + 1 equals 5 then I should go and construct the argument to counter it and prove something that is how I think it is? That if the world was flat, I should provide evidence that irrefutably claims otherwise?

And yet when someone makes an unsubstantiated claim that socialist governments result in dictatorships or any of the other claims of the post, that's fine and it's up to me to prove otherwise?

You can't have things both ways in one favour; be equally critical or don't. Surprised i need to point that out!

 

[Gen]

So if someone said 1 + 1 equals 5 then I should go and construct the argument to counter it and prove something that is how I think it is? That if the world was flat, I should provide evidence that irrefutably claims otherwise?

And yet when someone makes an unsubstantiated claim that socialist governments result in dictatorships or any of the other claims of the post, that's fine and it's up to me to prove otherwise?

You can't have things both ways in one favour; be equally critical or don't. Surprised i need to point that out!

It's not up to you to do anything. But if you're going to join in, adding something of substance would be good and helpful. That was my point. You say Mila is wrong but don't say why; you aren't burdened or obligated to post at all but it seems useless and self-serving to say something contrary without saying "and here's why".

Again, I don't know much about the topic so I think it'd be useful if someone who did added to it, if they believe Mila is wrong. But alas.

 

[Ms_Diane]

I disagree with @supermila on heaps of things and I agree with your first point, but essentially saying "lol u dumb" without adding anything to counter what she's saying is kind of pointless and seems more like you're trying to look superior than actually make a point. I don't know much at all about what she's talking about but if you have links or info to counter it, I'm sure it would benefit lots of us to see it rather than just snarkiness.

Agreed that the snarkiness is not helpful, but it is true that @supermila is confusing these ideas and jumping to conclusions about the things that I said. I understand and respect that she has reasons for thinking about it the way that she does though.

I could go into more details about these ideologies but I don't know if I really want to - if you want to know more about the differences between them and get more context about the baggage they carry, even reading wikipedia will get you off to a start. I don't want to be the person to try and explain that stuff on here because it's stressing me out.

 

[EspiKvlt]

I disagree with @supermila on heaps of things and I agree with your first point, but essentially saying "lol u dumb" without adding anything to counter what she's saying is kind of pointless and seems more like you're trying to look superior than actually make a point. I don't know much at all about what she's talking about but if you have links or info to counter it, I'm sure it would benefit lots of us to see it rather than just snarkiness.

I agree and had voted "agree" to that post before they edited it to add those nasty comments. (although it doesn't say they did so apparently i just totally glossed over the second part - my bad, i've been awake for 15 hours and it's only 3 pm lmao)

Insulting people accomplishes nothing but making you look like a rude person who no one wants to bother interacting with.

 

[TeganTrex]

-Walks in-
-Sees a bunch of white-passing people discussing whether white privilege is real-
-Sees people mentioning communism and linking it to socialism and linking that to the liberal left-
-Facepalms self to death-

If you can't understand that the justice system, and our predominately western european based society, treats Black, Latino, and other dark-skinned PoC with a negative bias, then you probably have white privilege.

The fact you can't even SEE that you have privilege is basically white privilege.

Poop me if you want. I have nothing to really offer this discussion without carefully deconstructing layers and layers of cultural, racial, and socioeconomic factors that cause white privilege, cis-privilege, and heteronormative privilege OR the fact that black people often face higher rates of discrimination socioeconomically that leads to them often being among the impoverished at higher rates, and that also affecting the higher rates of "crime" amongst impoverished minorities etc.

The American Dream is a goddamn lie.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

http://theundefeated.com/features/jordan-speaks-out-on-shootings-of-african-americans-police/

-Sees a bunch of white-passing people discussing whether white privilege is real-

The American Dream is a goddamn lie.

I remember hearing my grandmother fume about blacks in the 70's. She was a product of her time, and she wanted blacks to get back over to their own water fountain. She hated the NAACP. She was convinced the system was giving an unfair advantage to blacks.

I have personally witnessed a couple of instances where some blacks used the cry of racism for personal gain. And for a long time, I was irked by the NAACP just because it was all about the advancement of colored people, i.e. did not include whites. But learning about the situation that led to the creation of that organization greatly changed my opinion of it.

I think white privilege is very real. I do not think that should be the focus. Blue privilege is what I view as the pressing concern.

“I was raised by parents who taught me to love and respect people regardless of their race or background, so I am saddened and frustrated by the divisive rhetoric and racial tensions that seem to be getting worse as of late,” he added. “I know this country is better than that, and I can no longer stay silent. We need to find solutions that ensure people of color receive fair and equal treatment AND that police officers – who put their lives on the line every day to protect us all – are respected and supported.”

The American Dream: a lie? a truth? or a goal?

I'd like for us to focus on the problems and how to solve them.

I would love to hear your opinion (if you feel like the bother) on how big of an impact the Drug War has had on all this.

 

[LioraVox]

Honest question : Why are people "required" to respect police?

 

[justjoinedtopost]

Honest question : Why are people "required" to respect police?

From what I've seen, you're not, but you are liable to get roughed up and thrown in jail if you don't.
Only one time have I gone through real police harassment/bullying. Made me feel scared, then helpless, then pissed off. Left a mark.
I have met a number of good cops too. The thing is though, when you run into one who is just looking to fuck with somebody, you really don't have a lot of recourse.

 

[LuckySmiles]

^^ I see your sarcasm. I still agree with your post.

“White Privilege”

Sorry.. I never witnessed enough of it to believe it was a thing until other white people told me it was a thing. So I figured.. maybe this is a thing. And then some black people told me that it wasn't a thing, and that I should never let anyone let me feel bad about myself or anything my family accomplished because of it and, call me crazy, but I'm more inclined to believe those people. But maybe it's because they never went to enough college to have people beat over their heads that this is a thing. I guess they must just be too disadvantaged to recognize all my privilege.

Sorry.not.sorry.

Any arguments I've seen directed at anyone who challenges the notion, are usually hypocrisy at it's finest. Poor black people who disagree: "don't know what they're talking about because they're too poor to see the truth."
Black men with Phd's with careers dedicated to studying these issues, and saying it's not what people think it is, "must not know what they're talking about because they're not in touch enough with their blackness." And white people are not allowed to even say a word.

Words on the internet have never stressed me out as much as gang related violence. This must be a result of all my privileges.

Respecting cops:

They're the ones dealing with dead bodies, walking into domestic violence where the victim turns around and starts attacking for arresting their partner who just attacked them...
They are meeting people at their worst on a daily basis, things many are "privileged" enough to rarely have to acknowledge. I don't know why it's so hard for people to cut them some slack in that regard. Especially highly sensitive people who need trigger warnings on everything. For real. I think If you want to live in a world shielded from these things, you have to respect the people that allow you to have that option. I don't think they're infallible, and I don't think everyone is qualified to do it, it is very difficult, but I still appreciate their job.
I didn't grow up afraid of someone challenging my world views on a computer, I grew up afraid of career criminals of every shade.

Yes it's their job, but I wouldn't want to live in a place where no one was there to do it. We could all probably get along just fine without camgirls (THE SHOCK! THE HORROR!!) But I don't think we'd get by too easily without the police.

 

[LioraVox]

So basically we should respect their job and by respecting the job we should just naturally respect them?

 

[Mila_]

^^ I see your sarcasm. I still agree with your post.

“White Privilege”

Sorry.. I never witnessed enough of it to believe it was a thing until other white people told me it was a thing. So I figured.. maybe this is a thing. And then some black people told me that it wasn't a thing, and that I should never let anyone let me feel bad about myself or anything my family accomplished because of it and, call me crazy, but I'm more inclined to believe those people. But maybe it's because they never went to enough college to have people beat over their heads that this is a thing. I guess they must just be too disadvantaged to recognize all my privilege.

Sorry.not.sorry.

Any arguments I've seen directed at anyone who challenges the notion, are usually hypocrisy at it's finest. Poor black people who disagree: "don't know what they're talking about because they're too poor to see the truth."
Black men with Phd's with careers dedicated to studying these issues, and saying it's not what people think it is, "must not know what they're talking about because they're not in touch enough with their blackness." And white people are not allowed to even say a word.

Words on the internet have never stressed me out as much as gang related violence. This must be a result of all my privileges.

Respecting cops:

They're the ones dealing with dead bodies, walking into domestic violence where the victim turns around and starts attacking for arresting their partner who just attacked them...
They are meeting people at their worst on a daily basis, things many are "privileged" enough to rarely have to acknowledge. I don't know why it's so hard for people to cut them some slack in that regard. Especially highly sensitive people who need trigger warnings on everything. For real. I think If you want to live in a world shielded from these things, you have to respect the people that allow you to have that option. I don't think they're infallible, and I don't think everyone is qualified to do it, it is very difficult, but I still appreciate their job.
I didn't grow up afraid of someone challenging my world views on a computer, I grew up afraid of career criminals of every shade.

Yes it's their job, but I wouldn't want to live in a place where no one was there to do it. We could all probably get along just fine without camgirls (THE SHOCK! THE HORROR!!) But I don't think we'd get by too easily without the police.

DAMN FAM! Only way you can finish this post is by droping the mic and walking slowly into the sunset.

[/thread]

 

[Mila_]

Double post cause my team is on a roll.

I think most people give too little credit to tradition and tend to think morals are irrational, oldfashioned, or plain stupid. However when you take the time to read what they thought about it in the past you realize they were sophisticated thinkers and much smarter than us.

So in case anyone is interested in learning the reasoning behins it, here is the deal with drugs and why a seemingly innocent crime like growing or possessing weed gets sentences similar to rapes which is a violent crime. At a first glance it seems like a mistake and fucked up laws but there are interesting reasons to support this.

A violent crime like rape or murder is terrible and needs a harsh sentence, but it is a type of crime in which 1 individual fucks another individual. 1 on 1. The chances that a murderer could inspire a wave of killers and murder becomes widespread is unlikely.

On the other hand growing a possesing pot or any other drug while you arent hurting another individual and thus it might seem harmless you are causing damage to society at large by introducing an illegal substance into society, trading, selling, or sharing it with friends. The fact that drugs have a negative impact on people's productivity, mental health, and general wellbeing makes it dangerous enough that it is deemed healthier for society not to have drug users. So by using and introducing drugs into society you are effectively helping drugs spread and other people to get hooked as well. The damage of what you are doing is spread among all of society so it isnt concentrated in a single individual like rape or murder is. It is a crime of the type individual vs society or 1 on 10000s. This is why the sentence is heavier than a slap on the wrist.

It is interesting to always try to see the other side cause I do think there are important truths there.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

So basically we should respect their job and by respecting the job we should just naturally respect them?

I've always been respectful and obedient when dealing with LEO. I appreciate them for the good they do. When I watch the First 48, or some episodes of COPS (not counting the drug bust episodes), I generally identify with their view. But that's LEO in front of the TV cameras.

I also have a great deal of contempt for them at times. I had my little bullying incident, a close family member also had a completely uncalled for run in with one that was just straight up bullying. I also had a family member who was a bully all throughout their teen years, dead set on a career in LE. Pretty clear the only reason they went into it was because it gave them a chance to have some authority over others.

I also used to have to drive a stretch of interstate daily that was the hunting ground for a Drug Interdiction Task Force. No telling how many times I saw cars pulled over getting searched. Irritated the hell out of me. They are not protecting. They are not serving. They are looking to snatch some shit.

At a first glance it seems like a mistake and fucked up laws but there are interesting reasons to support this.

I would have gone with "dubious justifications for a knee-jerk overreaction to a moral panic" instead of the word reasons.

 

[LuckySmiles]

So basically we should respect their job and by respecting the job we should just naturally respect them?

Yes, but also if you appreciate having a civilized society.
If they ask you to do something by the authority of the law, you have to respect their request. They're just an agent of a civil society you enjoy the privileges of.

But they get less respect, and it's tolerated. We are not allowed to judge any group of people based on the actions of a few... unless they are cops.It goes on here. It goes on everywhere.

They're are plenty laws that could be taken up with, but that's a whole other talk. And that's the talk the politicians don't want you to have, when they turn their backs on the police. I've said this 100 times though already in this thread.

 

[Ms_Diane]

^^ I see your sarcasm. I still agree with your post.

“White Privilege”

Sorry.. I never witnessed enough of it to believe it was a thing until other white people told me it was a thing. So I figured.. maybe this is a thing. And then some black people told me that it wasn't a thing, and that I should never let anyone let me feel bad about myself or anything my family accomplished because of it and, call me crazy, but I'm more inclined to believe those people. But maybe it's because they never went to enough college to have people beat over their heads that this is a thing. I guess they must just be too disadvantaged to recognize all my privilege.

Sorry.not.sorry.

Any arguments I've seen directed at anyone who challenges the notion, are usually hypocrisy at it's finest. Poor black people who disagree: "don't know what they're talking about because they're too poor to see the truth."
Black men with Phd's with careers dedicated to studying these issues, and saying it's not what people think it is, "must not know what they're talking about because they're not in touch enough with their blackness." And white people are not allowed to even say a word.

Words on the internet have never stressed me out as much as gang related violence. This must be a result of all my privileges.

Respecting cops:

They're the ones dealing with dead bodies, walking into domestic violence where the victim turns around and starts attacking for arresting their partner who just attacked them...
They are meeting people at their worst on a daily basis, things many are "privileged" enough to rarely have to acknowledge. I don't know why it's so hard for people to cut them some slack in that regard. Especially highly sensitive people who need trigger warnings on everything. For real. I think If you want to live in a world shielded from these things, you have to respect the people that allow you to have that option. I don't think they're infallible, and I don't think everyone is qualified to do it, it is very difficult, but I still appreciate their job.
I didn't grow up afraid of someone challenging my world views on a computer, I grew up afraid of career criminals of every shade.

Yes it's their job, but I wouldn't want to live in a place where no one was there to do it. We could all probably get along just fine without camgirls (THE SHOCK! THE HORROR!!) But I don't think we'd get by too easily without the police.

White privilege can be acknowledged and checked without guilt. Bitterness is a sign of resentment at having your white privilege questioned.

I don't think anyone is saying we don't need police?

Trigger warnings? I don't now what this has do with anything. The bottom line is people just want the cops to do a better fucking job. It's not disrespectful to expect and ask more of a public service department if some things aren't working.

I guess if you don't agree with the way some activists do things that's one thing (but that's kind of like, welcome to activism), but I don't see the point of arguing over whether the problem exists. If you want to understand something better, then that's a different conversation. I guess that's the conversation I was hoping we would have.

I think that there will be changes in how the police are recruited and trained. I really think those changes are coming. Denying that there are problems means you will be left out the conversation that is happening with police departments. Getting sidelined and angry over how some activists are doing things and how media is reporting it will only take you away from the real discussion that is happening.

 

[Ms_Diane]

Sorry for the double post.

We are not allowed to judge any group of people based on the actions of a few... unless they are cops.It goes on here. It goes on everywhere.

@LuckySmiles I think you keep saying this over and over because you think there are only a few and it is not a big problem. If you are going to continue arguing that there are no problems with the police then people are going to continue disagreeing with you.

 

[LuckySmiles]

Sorry for the double post.



@LuckySmiles I think you keep saying this over and over because you think there are only a few and it is not a big problem. If you are going to continue arguing that there are no problems with the police then people are going to continue disagreeing with you.

Tell me the total number of police officers in this country compared to how many are shitty at their job, and I will believe you that it's more than a few percent. I know there's over a million police in America but I don't know how many are patrol, desk jockeys etc. etc.

From the start of this conversation I have mentioned that there are shitty cops. I have never denied that, once. I have repeatedly expressed how that is not the only factor to blame and looking at things so one dimensionally will only hurt your cause.

 

[DFT]

Ms_Diane - police agencies almost universally have ride-along programs. I suggest you take advantage - it might just reinforce your view.

Police aren't perfect. Nor is hatred against police. Gaining knowledge is to the good though, yes?

 

[Ms_Diane]

I'm not going to add to the statistics argument lol.

Why not listen to what a former Seattle Police Chief has to say on the topic?

 

[DFT]

I'm not going to add to the statistics argument lol.

Indeed, get off that couch of arguing articles - put your ass in a seat for one day.

 

[Mila_]

I'm not going to add to the statistics argument lol.

Why not listen to what a former Seattle Police Chief has to say on the topic?

When you make the argument that there is systemic racism involving the police and considering all races are equal under the law, you must prove that a statistically significant number of police officers are motivated by race. The burden of proof is on your side. Testimonies, stories by the bonfire, and anecdotal evidence while nice, are insufficient.

 

[Ms_Diane]

guys it's a thread on internet forum. burden of proof? i don't care what is sufficient or insufficient for you mila.

I just want to talk with people about the issues and hear opinions and learn stuff.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

When you make the argument that there is systemic racism involving the police and considering all races are equal under the law, you must prove that a statistically significant number of police officers are motivated by race. The burden of proof is on your side. Testimonies, stories by the bonfire, and anecdotal evidence while nice, are insufficient.

Forgetting the numbers, and the disturbing political bent of some in the movement, do you believe there is a genuine complaint at the root of these protests? Do you believe that police are going too far?

 

[Mila_]

Forgetting the numbers, and the disturbing political bent of some in the movement, do you believe there is a genuine complaint at the root of these protests? Do you believe that police are going too far?

Nope. I believe there is a lot of racial opportunism on the part of the agitators (BLM leadership, Al Sharpton, etc) and a lot of cynicism in the part of media (CNN's Don Lemon is a card carrying fuckwit). Believing there is a system of oppression against black people in the US is as crazy as believing in the Patriarchy. Nobody with half a brain takes any of this seriously, it is Tumblr fodder.

I also do not believe in the "police brutality" meme. Individual mistakes by the police are made for sure, they aren't immune to accidents. And there are probably individual cops with a mental problem using their uniform to get power trips, and racist individual cops for sure, like in any profession. There are even bus drivers drunk on power who will abuse their uniform too, but I doubt this constitutes a systemic problem. If anything I would have to see hard evidence that there is, in fact, an over-arching problem but I haven't been shown sufficient proof to sustain any of these claims. So I don't believe in them.

See, the thing I believe is people don't understand that cops face violent situations all the fucking time, it is their job. And they have firearms for a reason. In the US where people have an easy access to firearms those confrontations will be messy and people will be killed by cops on occasion. It is part of the job. And I even support the right of a cop to assess the risk in a situation and act preemptively because otherwise he wont be able to perform his job which is keeping law abiding citizens safe. If you do not want to be shot by the police or tased don't attack a police officer, don't threaten to kill them, don't resist arrest, and don't try to take their gun.

 

[altern8]

Nobody with half a brain takes any of this seriously, it is Tumblr fodder.
.

If you're just going to accuse everyone who believes differently of being an idiot or somehow "brainwashed by the left," why even bother having this conversation?

 

[LioraVox]

I guess for me, I can respect the job and not the person because I don't know them. I don't know if theyre a person who should be respected or not. Like aside from the duties of their job- do they help the community or are they a shit posting troll. Or do they beat their wives and are crazy stalkers (like the movies). Are they a person that speaks up against the bad cops, or do they stay silent and choose to be on the side of abuse of power. You literally never know, and the way I was raised was "if you want respect, you have to earn it" not "if you want respect you give respect" because then you'll look like a fool being respectful to someone who is disrespecting you.

I think that if cops went into situations a little more level headed, we wouldn't be having these types of discussions. I think if there was an overall reform on how the public gets guns and also some form of stress therapy for LEO's, and a reduction on the need to fulfil quotas then the public and the police would have a healthy coexistence.

I don't think it's fair to say "If you do not want to be shot by the police or tased don't attack a police officer, don't threaten to kill them, don't resist arrest, and don't try to take their gun" -while it is a valid argument of common sense, not every case is because the citizen did any of these things. Making statements like this is implying that all the citizens who have died during their interaction with the cops are responsible for their own death while also absolving the responsibility the police have to protect and serve at all times -not when it's convenient for them. It's like blaming victim of a rape case- "well if you wear less form fitting clothing, or if you didn't smile at him etc etc. You wouldnt have gotten raped". That places the outcome and the burden of the situation onto the victim 100% of the time. This needs to change, and they should be held accountable for their actions at all times.

Why are there quotas anyway? I think that's like the biggest thing that's hurting the police-public relationship. Because, from one black persons perspective it's always about numbers instead of actually protecting the community. Quotas make cops predators. There needs to be a change at the core of law enforcement. Instead of holding onto the practice to monetize criminals they should refocus on actually protecting the community.