# BLM stops ACLU event: do they have a point? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 4, 2017, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977 "2017-10-04T18:52:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/101 "2017-10-06T00:04:34Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > The only black lives matter supporters vehemently object to the ACLU’s free speech, according to the linked article at the top of this thread. The only black lives matter supporters vehemently object that blue (police) lives matter. The only black lives matter supporters vehemently object that gay lives matter. It certainly seems as if the only black lives matter supporters only support black lives. Damn the ACLU try trying to speak while the only black lives matter supporters are shouting them down. You keep referring to a fictional group. Wouldn’t it be better if we all talked about real world people? If you’d prefer fiction, maybe you’d like to start a thread in Cafe Society? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/102 "2017-10-06T00:34:09Z")
_Maybe_ the Nation of Islam, but they’ve always been that way, so I don’t think that would count. > [@2sense](#): > > You can’t threaten the President and hide behind free speech. I see no reason why we shouldn’t extend that protection to the rest of us. :dubious: It doesn’t? Last time I checked, I can’t threaten to kill my next door neighbor and get away without a visit from my friendly neighborhood policemen. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/103 "2017-10-06T00:49:01Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > The ACLU didn’t kill anyone, but they did give the Nazis the bullets, BLM are right to remind people of this. The result of Charlottesville wasn’t free speech, but violence and death. > > You can’t wash your hands of that. Violent hate groups are violent people who gather in support of violence. That’s their _raison d’etre_. You can’t blindly accept ‘free speech’ as a fig leaf when one starts killing people. That’s ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/104 "2017-10-06T01:13:06Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Last time I checked, I can’t threaten to kill my next door neighbor and get away without a visit from my friendly neighborhood policemen. Don’t tell **Evan Drake**. That means free speech as a concept is destroyed! (Though you’re right that what I said didn’t really make sense.) ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/105 "2017-10-06T04:01:50Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > The alt-right/Klan/Nazis are not marginal in your country’s politics Charlottesville was the largest gathering in a long time. It had double the number of counterprotesters. There were maybe a thousand nazis in the biggest nazi event in ages. What counts as “marginal” here? NAMBLA? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/106 "2017-10-06T07:14:18Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Charlottesville was the largest gathering in a long time. It had double the number of counterprotesters. There were maybe a thousand nazis in the biggest nazi event in ages. What counts as “marginal” here? NAMBLA? In some cases, it’s not the number, but the positioning. Police officials, media owners, local and federal senators, the president of the freaking country… If this truly wasn’t a problem in America, BLM most likely wouldn’t exist to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/107 "2017-10-06T10:08:12Z")
ACLU really pissed me off. 1971? Then\* they\* totally pissed me off, later. Several times. Even today, when I write them a check, I grit my teeth with chagrin. And then I sign it. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/108 "2017-10-06T10:16:51Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > In some cases, it’s not the number, but the positioning. Police officials, media owners, local and federal senators, the president of the freaking country… If this truly wasn’t a problem in America, BLM most likely wouldn’t exist to begin with. [Trump is not a Nazi](http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/). I’m not sure which senators are nazis, but assuming that any of them actually are (everything in the above article applies just as well to Steve King, and he’s the worst I can think of) do you think any of them are candid or public about it, or do you think that them saying, “I openly and honestly profess to being a nazi, and a supporter of the ideology of the NSDAP” would end their political careers? Let’s not inflate the category of “nazi”. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/109 "2017-10-06T10:34:49Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > [Trump is not a Nazi](http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/). I’m not sure which senators are nazis, but assuming that any of them actually are (everything in the above article applies just as well to Steve King, and he’s the worst I can think of) do you think any of them are candid or public about it, or do you think that them saying, “I openly and honestly profess to being a nazi, and a supporter of the ideology of the NSDAP” would end their political careers? Let’s not inflate the category of “nazi”. Just to expand on this… I don’t want to minimize the problem of rising far-right nationalism. But if we’re going to make the argument that Nazis are uniquely worthy of having their rights removed because they’re violent, we’re going to need to make it clear what is and is not a nazi, and differentiate _based on that violence_. The response to violence is violence. The response to speech you don’t like, even if that speech seems to imply violence, is more speech. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/110 "2017-10-06T11:02:18Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Just to expand on this… I don’t want to minimize the problem of rising far-right nationalism. But if we’re going to make the argument that Nazis are uniquely worthy of having their rights removed because they’re violent, we’re going to need to make it clear what is and is not a nazi, and differentiate _based on that violence_. The response to violence is violence. The response to speech you don’t like, even if that speech seems to imply violence, is more speech. Do you think any ideology or ethos can be inherently violent? Are minorities wrong to feel an existential threat from white supremacist beliefs, even from people who don’t (seem) to act on it? (Even then, I’ve seen arguments that racist political actions, even if legal within the framework of the law, are themselves actual violence.) As I’ve remarked before, I think your problem in convincing some people is that many of them already feel that the system is corrupt and racist and ACTIVELY trying to LITERALLY murder them RIGHT NOW, if not through police guns, then through, say, active neglect of water systems, or capitalist policies that keep the poor, especially minorities, from being anything but poor and starving while coddling the rich. There’s a lot of justified frustration out there, and I don’t think those who feel it will find your argument for saying that genocidal speech is A-OK very convincing. What good will “more speech” do them? Maybe you don’t feel there are enough of that type of person out there to matter. But frankly, I think that more such people are being generated every day under the Trump Administration, and I think ignoring that is the wrong thing to do. (One big reason being that these are exactly the kinds of people who clash physically with Nazis to begin with, for obvious reasons.) ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/111 "2017-10-06T11:25:14Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > The ACLU didn’t kill anyone, but they did give the Nazis the bullets Even assuming you’re speaking metaphorically, I can’t figure out any way to interpret this that would make it a true statement. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/112 "2017-10-06T11:28:59Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > As I’ve remarked before, I think your problem in convincing some people is that many of them already feel that the system is corrupt and racist and ACTIVELY trying to LITERALLY murder them RIGHT NOW, if not through police guns, then through, say, active neglect of water systems, or capitalist policies that keep the poor, especially minorities, from being anything but poor and starving while coddling the rich. There’s a lot of justified frustration out there, and I don’t think those who feel it will find your argument for saying that genocidal speech is A-OK very convincing. What good will “more speech” do them? It will do them the same good as it does for Nazis, which is the point. Nazis will try to convince the rest of us that Jews are secretly running the government, or whatever, and the people you mention will try to convince the rest of us that the system is LITERALLY murdering them RIGHT NOW, and the rest of us decide which side, if either, is right. Thus freedom of speech works mostly for the benefit of whichever side has the better case. In your judgment, who has the stronger case? Why would those with the stronger case get to use violence? Why would they need to? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/113 "2017-10-06T11:53:45Z")
It’s not (necessarily) “the rest of us” that’s the problem, though: it’s the entirety of the system. I think that’s the difference. I know you agree with the current government on major issues, but we see that in the health care protests and, yes, in BLM. Not to mention, surely you’ve heard liberals complain about Brietbart and Fox News and foreign propaganda; even if you don’t agree with these particulars, perhaps you might acknowledge that sometimes “the stronger case” doesn’t necessarily win out. (This may be put poorly; it’s way too early right now. I’ll think about it some more in the coming day.) ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/114 "2017-10-06T12:05:43Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > As I’ve remarked before, I think your problem in convincing some people is that many of them already feel that the system is corrupt and racist and ACTIVELY trying to LITERALLY murder them RIGHT NOW, if not through police guns, then through, say, active neglect of water systems, or capitalist policies that keep the poor, especially minorities, from being anything but poor and starving while coddling the rich. There’s a lot of justified frustration out there, and I don’t think those who feel it will find your argument for saying that genocidal speech is A-OK very convincing. What good will “more speech” do them? Ask yourself this: if it became illegal to openly express the opinions in the paragraph above, would they cease to exist? If not, why wouldn’t the same be true of the frustration and resentment that gives rise to white nationalism? Given that, what’s the point in trying to squash anyone’s voice? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/115 "2017-10-06T12:27:27Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Voting age adults shouldn’t get a pass on ignorance of junior high concepts. It’s like excusing a college student for the inability to multiply fractions, compute compound interest, read a map, or name 10 states. I’ve been led to believe that saying that someone is still “[learning](http://www.independent.co.uk/News/world/americas/us-politics/comey-testimony-trump-paul-ryan-response-new-to-this-comments-latest-news-a7779796.html)” is an acceptable means of excusing someone saying or doing stupid, ignorant crap. > [@Guinastasia](#): > > The ACLU has been defending “hate-speech” for decades. Remember the whole business with the KKK wanting to march in Skokie? The [NSPA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skokie,_Illinois#NSPA_controversy) (a.k.a. American Nazis), not the KKK. But that’s the case I often think of whenever I hear about the ACLU defending hateful speech. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Attempted thread summary: youth is wasted on the young. Pretty much. > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > The far greater risk is that we respond to this tiny threat by destroying liberties that are essential to _all_ of us, and especially those under threat. I concur. America has a bad habit of overreacting to threats (left, right and other) and doing more damage to itself than the original threat posed. > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Just to expand on this… I don’t want to minimize the problem of rising far-right nationalism. But if we’re going to make the argument that Nazis are uniquely worthy of having their rights removed because they’re violent, we’re going to need to make it clear what is and is not a nazi, and differentiate _based on that violence_. The response to violence is violence. The response to speech you don’t like, even if that speech seems to imply violence, is more speech. Or, [as US Air Force Academy Chief Lt. General Jay Silveria said recently](https://qz.com/1090765/us-air-force-academy-read-a-generals-powerful-speech-condemning-racist-slurs/): > [@](#): > > Ladies and gentlemen, you may have heard that some people down in the prep school wrote some racial slurs on some message boards. If you haven’t heard that, I wanted you to hear it from me. If you’re outraged by those words then you’re in the right place. That kind of behavior has no place at the prep school, it has no place at USAFA, and it has no place in the US Air Force. > > You should be outraged, not only as an airman, but as a human being. And I’ll tell you, that **the appropriate response for horrible language and horrible ideas, the appropriate response is a better idea.** It is all too tempting to try and quash disagreeable speech. But as noted, this is a solution that is, in the long run, much worse than the problem it is solving. The battle of countering bad speech with better speech is a much harder one, but a necessary one nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/116 "2017-10-06T12:27:45Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > It’s not (necessarily) “the rest of us” that’s the problem, though: it’s the entirety of the system. I think that’s the difference. I know you agree with the current government on major issues, but we see that in the health care protests and, yes, in BLM. I’m not sure that this difference makes a difference - the rest of us are the ones who need to be convinced. If “the rest of us” are the system, well, that doesn’t change anything. We still need to be convinced, and neither Nazis or Antifa or the ACLU or BLM or anyone else gets to use violence to silence anyone else. > [@](#): > > Not to mention, surely you’ve heard liberals complain about Brietbart and Fox News and foreign propaganda; even if you don’t agree with these particulars, perhaps you might acknowledge that sometimes “the stronger case” doesn’t necessarily win out. Sure, I would agree that the stronger case doesn’t always win. The issue is, who gets to decide what is the stronger case? The US is a republic, and majority rules (within certain limits). Thus, almost by definition, the stronger case is the one which the majority accepts. If “liberalism is white supremacy”, and “liberalism” includes majority rule, then BLM has an uphill battle ahead of them. They have to convince the majority to give up authority, and “majority rules that majority shouldn’t rule” is a tough sell. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/117 "2017-10-06T12:53:51Z")
If liberalism is white supremacy, and it kinda is, at least in the sense that the Euro-American version regards white ideas as superior, then the answer is for African-American philosophers to come up with their own ideas(which many have), and for African-Americans and non-blacks who agree with those philosophers to push their views so that they become as important as Locke, Rawls, Keynes, and Galbreath. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/118 "2017-10-06T13:03:42Z")
Almost for the first time, a Noam Chomsky quote is useful > [@](#): > > Colorless green ideas sleep furiously. Ideas aren’t black or white. If free speech for everyone is a bad idea, then it is a bad idea even a black guy came up with it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/119 "2017-10-06T13:33:13Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Do you think any ideology or ethos can be inherently violent? Eh, that’s a layer deeper than the argument being had here; I’m granting for the sake of argument that nazi-style fascism is inherently violent. I think there’s a good case to be made that that just isn’t really true. > [@](#): > > Are minorities wrong to feel an existential threat from white supremacist beliefs, even from people who don’t (seem) to act on it? Depends how you mean that. In the sense that, “Shit, we have to prevent these people from gaining any _actual_ power,” they’re definitely not wrong. In the sense that, “Shit, these people are going to murder us _right now_ and the only reasonable reaction is violence and limiting people’s rights,” they’re almost certainly wrong. Nazis are not an operational threat. White supremacists are not an operational threat. If you insist on stretching the definition to include everyone who thinks white people are better, or who fails an implicit association test, > [@](#): > > (Even then, I’ve seen arguments that racist political actions, even if legal within the framework of the law, are themselves actual violence.) The entire purpose of the state is a legal, coordinated, predominately consensual monopoly on violence. (I’m trying to avoid [the worst argument in the world](http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_noncentral_fallacy_the_worst_argument_in_the/) here, sorry if this seems overly detailed.) Violence is not inherently wrong or bad in this context; it must be considered in the context of the effect it has. That said: yeah, racist political actions are almost always the _bad_ kind of violence. The question is, how do you push back against that effectively? Trying to remove the state’s monopoly on violence and fight back with violent seems like, on the meta level, an _exceedingly_ risky move to make (because the Nazis are going to do that too, and feel like they have an excuse), as well as one that is very unlikely to work on an object level (because the government will crush you like a bug and you will probably _lose_ public support - how much damage do you think Micah Xavier Johnson did to the movements he claimed to espouse?). Instead, the way to go is to fight back politically. A little like the people in the OP, just, yanno, not being fucking stupid. > [@](#): > > As I’ve remarked before, I think your problem in convincing some people is that many of them already feel that the system is corrupt and racist and ACTIVELY trying to LITERALLY murder them RIGHT NOW, if not through police guns, then through, say, active neglect of water systems, or capitalist policies that keep the poor, especially minorities, from being anything but poor and starving while coddling the rich. There’s a lot of justified frustration out there, and I don’t think those who feel it will find your argument for saying that genocidal speech is A-OK very convincing. What good will “more speech” do them? It might convince others to join their side. It might make their claims (as presented by you) sound less hysterical. There are things wrong, but if someone thinks there are people actively trying to murder you right now in the political system, most of the time that’s paranoia speaking. There’s tons of things wrong with our treatment of African-Americans. But these are problems best solved through political means. Who do you punch to fix Flint? Who do you punch to solve inequality? The nazis have nothing to do with that. > [@](#): > > Maybe you don’t feel there are enough of that type of person out there to matter. But frankly, I think that more such people are being generated every day under the Trump Administration, and I think ignoring that is the wrong thing to do. (One big reason being that these are exactly the kinds of people who clash physically with Nazis to begin with, for obvious reasons.) I’ll gladly speak to those people, if they’re willing. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2017, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977/120 "2017-10-06T14:09:57Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If liberalism is white supremacy, and it kinda is, at least in the sense that the Euro-American version regards white ideas as superior, then the answer is for African-American philosophers to come up with their own ideas(which many have), and for African-Americans and non-blacks who agree with those philosophers to push their views so that they become as important as Locke, Rawls, Keynes, and Galbreath. As I noted earlier in the thread, it is weird and ahistorical to limit our understanding of the sources of modern American rights-based liberalism solely to white theorists like “Locke, Rawls, Keynes, and [Galbraith]”. (What the hell does an economist like Keynes have to do with the evolution of rights-based liberalism, anyway? If Keynes is a significant source of our modern understanding of civil rights then so is every other major economist and political theorist of the 20th century.) Our modern US views of rights-based liberalism are **also** influenced by the ideas of many nonwhite people, such as Frederick Douglass, Gandhi, King, Randolph, Marshall, and a bunch of others. It is kind of fucking creepy to keep describing its history as though only its white contributors are entitled to any credit for its ideas, while its nonwhite contributors are ignored or treated as merely derivative. Even if modern American liberal ideology were indeed the product solely of white thinkers, that still wouldn’t make it a “white idea”, as **Shodan** notes. But that kind of rhetoric is even more irritatingly inaccurate given that **modern American liberal ideology is _not_ the product solely of white thinkers**. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blm-stops-aclu-event-do-they-have-a-point/797977.md?page=7)