Their position is Black Lives Matter - not some black lives matter; not “only the best and brightest black lives matter.” Their movement cares about the lives of people who may be just average, or “gasp” below average.
Your points are barely even relevant to this discussion AFAICT; you want them to care about only certain people, or people who you personally think are worthy of caring about. That is certainly a worthwhile topic, I just don’t see how it fits in here.
Well I was only looking at the college students who had issues and many of those were academic in nature like wanting more black faculty and students. I didnt read about any of them getting unequal treatment. Remember MU already has a black student union and the student body president is black. Nobody is being told to sit in the back of the bus or to vacate a lunch counter.
But I will go back to my statement that if you want respect on a college campus, you get the best grades. You be the kind of students the professors like to work with. Heck, you be the kind of students others want to cheat off of.
Achievement is the best way of giving the finger to those who dont like you.
Let me just pull my bootstraps a little tighter so the white people will be more accepting of me.
Wow. They’re protesting the nuclear family. that explains a great deal.
No it isn’t. The movement completely ignores black on black violence which is the overwhelming cause of deaths. And it blames Western culture for the nuclear family. That’s an astounding flag to rally around. In the real world good parents keep their kids in school and push for the highest level of achievement possible. That’s universal around the world. Take away this mechanism and the result is poor attendance and low graduation rates.
You can lead a culturally disaffected child to school, but you can’t make him study.
It would have been more accurate to say that their stated position is Black lives Matter. But either way, there is nothing to suggest that their platform involves any kind of qualifiers such as placing more emphasis on high achieving blacks.
Mostly what you are telling me here is that you personally disagree with their position; one data point. The question in the OP is more along the lines of is their strategy likely to be effective in a border sense.
I am gleaning from this that you feel the way to end racism is to achieve more. That in itself has generally racist elements to me. Fighting racism means that the average achieving black student has the same opportunities and respect as the average achieving white student; not respecting only black students with abnormal levels of academic accomplishment.
Their position rings hollow because it ignores the vast numbers of murders committed. I disagree with their tactics because it’s passive aggressive bullshit. It also spurs the kind of violence that has resulted in the murders of police officers.
that’s a lovely thought except most major cities are filled with black kids who have no apparent interest in average achievement. This is a cultural problem and no amount of money will fix it. Until that is addressed nothing will change.
Oh, that’s rich. Equal opportunities does not mean getting accepted into university over another student whose SAT is 400 points higher than yours just because you are an African-American and they are an Asian-American. The admissions process is already blatantly and proudly racist, in favour of African-Americans.
I’m not saying it does. How would anything I say lead you to that conclusion? Your point is tangential at best.
All you are telling me is that black people have to prove themselves through achievement in order for their concerns to be relevant. I neither agree nor disagree with this assertion - but this isn’t really advancing the discussion any more than the last poster who brought up the same point.
Because your average achieving black student is given better opportunities than their white or Asian peers even when the others are significantly better students, yet you speak as if the black student is the victim of racism rather than the beneficiary.
Close, people have to prove themselves through achievement. That’s always been true.
Umm… yeah. Put down the protest sign and get your butt to class.
Look at the Tuskegee Airmen. They were kept out of the program to become pilots. Once they became pilots they were also discriminated against. Later on though their abilities earned them respect.
People DO notice ability and talent.
It is truly a colossal blunder they did not call their movement what they meant, Black Lives Matter Also. Apparently it never occurred to anyone in charge the opposition would claim their movement to prevent innocent deaths was self serving entitlism. Boy, they fucked up.
Even if this were true (it’s not), it would be utterly irrelevant, because not only does the extremely high rate of black-on-black crime have its roots in institutionalized racism, but people can care about more than one thing. Oppression olympics and concern trolling is not useful to the conversation, particularly coming from someone who is overtly hostile to the movement.
uh huh. I must have missed the protests in depressed areas. the last one to make the news had the Reverend Jackson leading the parade. He’s the poster child of racial nonsense.
The institutional racism line doesn’t begin to explain why education is given so little consideration. The rest of your post is nothing but a personal attack designed to shut down debate. Good luck with that.
I hope I’m not being politically incorrect here, and let me state up front that Laquan was gunned down when it sure appears on video he wasn’t a direct threat, and that the wheels of justice are (slowly) grinding on the officer in question and that’s a good thing. That said, Laquan was not innocent since he had a knife out, met the base description of someone breaking into vehicles, sliced the tire of a police car, etc.
I’m also fully cognizant that the white cops in my white my middle class suburb drew pistols on my lily white ass for the crime of being a teenage dickhead male [technically trespassing on the roof of a gas station, smoking cigars (swisher sweets) below legal age and making a lot of noise (if we’d been quiet probably no one would have noticed)], and didn’t pull the trigger in the late 1970’s. I didn’t have a weapon in my hand although I did try to run before stopping when I looked down the barrel of a pistol. If they had shot me, it would have been big news, lawsuits and a settlement.
But there is a huge difference in the above two scenarios, and that of a truly innocent teen getting whacked by a cop walking down the street regardless of what color they are.
My own two cents is that BLM should leverage “all lives matter” and work the system to their advantage. BLM is inherently an us versus them proposition. YMMV.
Your complaints are, quite frankly, not useful to the debate. They’re a distraction, trying to say, “why worry about X, you should worry about Y instead”. It fundamentally is trying to derail the debate. And it shouldn’t. “What about black on black crime” is not a useful statement. It shows a complete disregard for what the movement is about, the history of what’s going on, and a lack of interest in the subject. It’s not something we should have to discuss in this thread.