A stranger walked up to me ten years ago, said “Hot enough for you?”
I said “Looks like it will rain.”
He said “All lives matter.”
Was this racist? Of course not. It did seem out of context though. I asked him if had any extra 'shrooms and walked on.
But that’s not what you meant.
Lately, blatant idiots and racists have been saying “All lives matter” in context. If you weren’t sure that this is asinine and racist, reread the thread. So somebody, quoted by FauxNews at a wingnut website, says the sentence is racist.
Now, one can imagine the woman saying something more tautological, as though she were instructing a jury or preparing an article for peer review. She could have said “In the present context, that statement is purposeless — either the speaker has woken from a years-long slumber ignorant of current events OR the person is bafflingly obtuse OR is some inhumane pedant OR, most likely, is racist.”
Yes, such a qualified sentence would have been more accurate technically than to just say “That statement is racist.”
@ Idle Thoughts - Surely you didn’t start this thread just to make that point. What am I missing?
BLM has condemned black-on-black violence very strongly since its inception. There are many other black-led movements and organizations whose primary focus is reducing black-on-black crime. BLM is an organization focused on police mistreatment of black people.
Not every organization needs to focus on every bad thing.
I believe that Magiver writes periodic letters to the American Cancer Society, demanding to know why they ignore heart disease and multiple sclerosis and diabetes. And why aren’t you called the American Health Society, anyway?
most mathematicians know what year it is. My cite shows 350 deaths so far this year and that’s not fully half way through. So your chart showing a total of 432 in 2014 and 488 in 2016 means a July 14 adjustment for those 2 years of 199 and 229 respectively.
Right now 2016 is at least 100 deaths ahead of both years.
Seems like an accelerating number to me but I didn’t plot it out day by day.
Really? the numbers are going up not down. I’m not seeing them march through crackdown. I see them marching through shopping areas and shutting down highways. So unless black on black violence is happening where they’re protesting I’m going to call bullshit on any claim made by BLM in this respect.
They’re literally another occupy wallstreet wanna-be rebels without a clue and now they’re sucking in violent racist groups like the New Blank Panthers.
Talk about moving the goalposts. Now you’re arguing that they should not only condemn black-on-black violence, but they are also to blame if their criticisms don’t actually lead to a reduction in the rate of violence? Another example of holding all African Americans responsible for the actions of some.
I guess they’re all just the same, right? No point distinguishing between them as individuals, i suppose?
They condemn it, but that’s not their focus. It’s okay for organizations to focus on different things. There are multiple black-led organizations that focus on black inner city violence. Not every organization needs to focus on every bad thing.
Refocusing the discussion to include those with a living wage already takes attention away from getting a living wage for those who need it. This doesn’t have anything to do with specific proposals, just calls to action.
If any BLM proponent proposed that the solution to police inequality was to have them start shooting white people at the same rate, then ALM would be a good thing to bring up.
Since I haven’t heard any BLM spokesperson say that white lives don’t matter, the too is implied. And short slogans are better. I don’t want to accuse anyone of anything, but ALM is not saying something important, but is mostly used as a counter and a devaluation of BLM.
Totally agreed. This by the way is my problem with Blue Lives Matters. Any police officer who’s signed onto this exclusive movement clearly doesn’t believe civilian lives matter and should be fired on the spot. Agreed?
No, it’s not OK for organizations to focus on different things when it singles out a race. It foments anger and hatred and is a lightening rod for racist groups like the New Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam.
I don’t think any phrase or symbol is intrinsically racist. So no. I think the “that’s racist1!!!” card is nothing more than a disingenuous tactic. It’s despicable wherever it’s used and those using it should feel bad.
I wonder what BLM thinks of the editor-in-chief of the Kankakee City News, an alternative newspaper for and run by blacks, saying “all lives matter”. I’m guessing not much due the paper supporting Trump.
Yes. When said in response to BLM, it’s a racist statement every time. Doesn’t mean the person saying it is a dedicated racist, but it’s a racist thing to say. When told “Black Lives Matter”, the only non-racist response is “Yep, totally agree”