Black Lives Matter... A flawed phrase

You’re goddamn right.

But wait! No need for logic. Didn’t you hear?

And there are people that do this - particularly during October when the pink ribbon campaigns kick off. “What about prostate cancer? How come there’s no campaign for that?” Of course there is, but that never seems to mollify their complaints. And then the fact they haven’t heard of these other campaigns makes me doubt their sincerity to the cause, or if they’re instead just using some other issue as a cudgel.

Complaining about the wording strikes me as just another way the majority insists that black people be 100% perfect in their complaints before they get some help. “Uh uh uh! You didn’t say the magic word!”

Dylan Noble wasn’t national news. No articles in the NY Times or Washington Post, for example.

Zachary Hammond qualifies but that was a year ago now.

That’s terrrrrrible logic.

So far this year, there have been 512 people shot and killed by police. The linked database allows for drilling into the individual cases, and it’s interesting. Yes, about twice as many whites have been killed as blacks. I haven’t looked at all of the cases, but clicking some random squares leads to cases like Steve Godfrey, (white) who was shot when he threatened to kill the deputies pursuing him. Or Phillip Ferry (white) who killed one police officer before being killed himself. Or David Brian Evans, who killed two deputies in the shootout at a Panera that ended his life. I am sure that there are some cases in the "white"section that are similar to Philando Castile; I just haven’t seen one yet in the database.

If you say to someone that black lives matter, and that person already believes black lives matter because they believe all lives matter, then it’s a perfectly reasonable response. I didn’t need a new movement to start to tell me that black lives matter, and that despite the number of people who say all lives matter that we aren’t doing anything about an obvious problem of people being killed for the crime of having dark skin.

There are three groups of people this movement has to speak to.

The group of people who will not hear the message no matter what, out of fear, ignorance, or hate, aren’t going to have their minds changed by a simple message. But there’s no point in giving them ammunition for their own agenda. What will work is to take away the security they feel as part of a popular opinion on the subject, and that means effectively reaching the other two groups.

The next group of people are those would say that they support the cause, but actually haven’t done anything about the problem. It’s not the simple message that’s difficult in this case, it’s the more detailed message about actually making changes, changing the laws and the way the police operate so cops who act out of fear, or prejudice, or simply apathy will think twice about how they deal with suspects. Simply talking isn’t going to do anything, appeasement measures have been tried before and failed, we need to break through at the local level and have laws changed so the police don’t go out on the streets already in fear that they can use to justify their actions. We don’t see officers convicted in the most blatant cases because the law allows them to kill people on the minimum justification that the officer who placed himself in danger fears for his own life. But this second group can be shamed for their inaction, placed at a higher standard publicly when it comes to voting for real change. This is a tough challenge for BLM to walk the tightrope between effectively garnering their support or leaving them to vote to maintain the status quo in the end.

The most important group to reach through effective messaging are those who can be swayed, like the undecideds in an election. It doesn’t matter why these people don’t understand the message or see the problem, they can be won over to create a clear majority. This is where clear messaging is most important, people like this can just as easily be swayed by the other side, BLM has to win them by speaking directly to a cause for justice that isn’t controversial, and can’t be readily misinterpreted.

Nobody needs to explain the cause to me, I’ve been behind it since I was a child. And I have walked the walk in my life. But I can find that the message can be improved. I recall hearing a civil rights leader from the 60s who later felt the ‘Black is Beautiful’ message was flawed. As much as anyone may feel that is a beneficial inarguable message, he felt it still led to division by those who didn’t look any deeper at the cause. He stated that the message should have been ‘Black is Beautiful Too’, that inclusion was the goal, that we don’t want an eternal conflict, we want unity. Changing peoples mind through a political movement is not easy, it takes time and can be a painful process. Rational discussion within the movement is necessary to win the day, attacking people just for disagreeing with the message is not productive. In the past couple of days I’ve seen one of the BLM co-founders on TV trying to explain the message better, this has to continue. It would have been better IMHO to add the word ‘Too’ to the phrase to begin with.

So you’re saying that because the beliefs of this group of undecideds hinges on the precision of a 3-word hash tag (never mind all the clips showing people getting gunned down for petty reasons, all the crying family members giving press conferences about the injustices they are going through…yes, let’s ignore this), and because this hash tag is worded such that disingenuous obfuscutators can readily feign offense to it (as has always been the tradition with movements that remind people of elephants in the room) we need to change this hash tag so these undecideds can finally catch up with everyone else who can readily see on their own–in the absence of any hash tags–there is a major problem with the way law enforcement treats black people.

Forgive me if I’m not persuaded by your impassioned plea to indulge the willfully ignorant in this way. Whether someone can grok the intent behind BLM or not, surely they should be able to recognize and understand the same problems BLM protestors and other activists are trying to fight. Inserting a “too” or “all” or whatever in a slogan doesn’t change facts that are increasingly becoming hard to deny, because we’re seeing them play out on TV now.

I wonder if black people would get behind the White Power movement if they simply changed their name to White Power But Other Kinds Of Power Are Cool Too.

Well if BLM actually stood for Black Lives Matter that would be relevant. But it’s focus is on perceived police violence toward black people. So your guess would be wrong.

But thanks for contacted their headquarters for permission.

Think for one second, and you’ll realize why this factoid is actually pretty shocking.

There is a major problem with the way law enforcement treats everyone. That is the ultimate point of all lives matter. The goal shouldn’t be for the police in this country to brutalize black citizens at an equal rate of white citizens. It should be stopping excessive police violence.

If I am shot by the police my name will not be in the New York Times. Beyonce will not pray for my family. There will be no protests. Obama will not weigh in on what my death means for the nation. That is why I do not agree that the phrase should be Black Lives Matter. I see no reason why Alton Sterling’s death should be mourned by the nation while Dylan Noble’s is mostly ignored.

Oh, I realize. A quarter of the deaths are black, while overall it’s about 12% of the country. I just wanted to forestall any “But look, there are twice as many whites killed than blacks!”

Black Lives Matter. Yes they do. Easy to understand. Three friggin words. Where’s the confusion?

:smack:

Some people add more in their heads. Like “Only”, or “More”, even “Too” is its own kind of fucked up. Then they blame the slogan rather than their own thought patterns.

I’ve tried that with fiction books as I read them, adding my own words here and there. It makes the story quite a jumbled mess.

What? This has already been explained. BLM means that all lives matter and raises awareness of an issue that is making it seem that some lives (hint hint) matter a bit less when it comes to police misconduct and extra-judicial executions.
“All lives Matter” is an obnoxious counter-phrase that does nothing but try to shut down the very valid issue of the way the black population is treated by law enforcement on a daily basis.

So you’re just campaigning for it to be changed to “Black Lives Matter Too” and then all is well in the world? A worthy cause, really, keep fighting the good fight!

I’m not saying anything is that simple. And I don’t think it’s about indulging the willfully ignorant. We have to realize that the willfully ignorant exist and avoid turning this into a battle between sides. Stop arguing the cause, I’m talking about the effectiveness of the message here. It can be improved.

There’s nothing wrong with the statement ‘All lives matter’. To say that it is gives ammunition to the opposition who can say that you don’t believe that all lives matter. Political slogans need to be carefully crafted to avoid traps like that. There is nothing but a shameful counter to the statement ‘All lives matter too’, it would have been better. Now the task is to find a way to make the message clearer to those in the middle. We can’t rely on people to be thoughtful and rational, most people live in a bubble only hearing the echoes of the same speech patterns over and over. The predictable pattern of behavior is repeating now where the dissatisfaction with economic hard times isn’t directed back at the leadership that created the problems but back at minorities in the population. You won’t change the minds of people with exclusive statements. To effect change requires careful planning, thoughtful leadership, strategy, and time, way too much time.

“Black lives matter” is important because it highlights how, for most of American history, black lives didn’t matter – even while authority figures would use sentiments equivalent to “all lives matter”.

In essence, the point of BLM (as I understand it) is “we’ve tried all lives matter – it doesn’t work. All lives matter has meant, for all of American history, that black lives didn’t matter. Let’s try putting the special emphasis on the lives that haven’t mattered for all our history.”

The main point here is that it is clearly the fault of black people, in not precisely enough formulating a concise slogan that addresses their concerns about the disproportionate killing of black people by police, that white people are struggling to comprehend those concerns. As phrased, the slogan “Black Lives Matter” is too offputting and leads white people to believe that their own feelings on the matter are in some way not as important as other people’s.

I understand there’s already a similar thread in which feminists are admonished for using language that renders men incapable of adopting a position of gender equality. If only all these black people and women would take the time to be more careful with their words, white people and men would totally be on board with helping to effect the societal changes needed to achieve the societal changes needed.

I think I just poked my tongue through my cheek