Blm?

[not2big]

BLM is rightfully under the impression that black lives are under tighter scrutiny by law enforcement and the Justice Department than white lives and want to even the scale so all lives are scrutinized equally.

[Dance Sucka]

I agree with this, but like I said my sense is the political will isn't there (I'm speaking specifically about the US, but it's probably true more broadly). The incentive structures aren't set up to actually solve problems for the average working person, and that includes cops as well as fast food workers, etc. The incentives are set up to do the minimal amount possible to keep most people's frustrations at bay so the corporate and political elite can maintain the status quo (ie, maintain their own power and wealth).

Funny thing is, this is a time when something interesting and meaningful might actually happen, given the combination of the social protests and the Covid deal, but I fear it will just be another flash in the pan, and regardless whether it's Trump or Biden, it'll just be business as usual.

Ok, I really gotta get off my soapbox. It's taco salad time at my house!

Interesting points. I dunno if the rate of police using excessive force has anything to do with incentive structures. Because of the community backlash, if you're a white officer and you shoot a minority civilian, even if it's a clean shoot and totally justified, you could still become a target of protest and hatred. The same goes for if the shoot is anything less than clean, plus your career is probably fucked. I imagine that these risks are known by all law enforcement, and that it comes as part of the territory and training. I wonder if we have any officers here who do PE who could provide a clearer perspective. It just doesn't make sense to me how any of this is related to incentives like power or money.

Apart from that...Taco salad sounds awesome!

BLM is rightfully under the impression that black lives are under tighter scrutiny by law enforcement and the Justice Department than white lives and want to even the scale so all lives are scrutinized equally.

While this makes sense, it's really an overgeneralization. I'm sure it's true in some cases, but there's far more evidence pointing to implicit racial bias than just plain scrutiny. Here's a great explanation of the issues and research on policing and racial disparity from the American Psychological Association: Policing in black & white

[madyogi]

I dunno if the rate of police using excessive force has anything to do with incentive structures ... It just doesn't make sense to me how any of this is related to incentives like power or money.

I'm not really talking about incentives for any individual officer. A few bad apples aside, officers are well intentioned and like I said, they're out there doing a mostly thankless job, often under dangerous circumstances. What I meant was the incentive structures are not really there at an institutional level to make meaningful reform. The power and money operate at a level quite apart from the average officer on the street.

I wonder if we have any officers here who do PE who could provide a clearer perspective.

I would also be interested in their perspective.

[Johnny D]

BLM is rightfully under the impression that black lives are under tighter scrutiny by law enforcement and the Justice Department than white lives and want to even the scale so all lives are scrutinized equally.

Are they, though? In the US, more crime is committed by blacks so it would stand to reason that they encounter LEO more frequently (now, if you want to talk about ending the policies which lead to crime, that's another issue) but they're not statistically more likely to be victims of LEO brutality when compared with the rate of brutality against other races per encounter.

[Johnny D]

The "all lives matter" response to BLM is an easy way to dismiss the real issues. Unfortunately, BLM isn't focusing their campaign on the real issues, making it increasingly harder to take them seriously. While policing reform is necessary in most places in the US, "defunding" the police isn't going to achieve the results that BLM would hope for. There are deeply seeded structural problems that go way beyond law enforcement, which have resulted in a systemic marginalization of blacks in the US. Sure, much of that legislation and policy of the past has since been removed, but the effects of it will take time and effort to undo. Ending "the war on drugs" would be a great start but there's still so much more in the system that has to be addressed. BLM is/was in a great position to bring awareness to these things but, instead, hung their hat on the more tangible issue of police brutality. It's too bad. That's an issue for all races in the US but BLM wants to own it and monopolize it as unique to their culture. Some years ago I thought they might be onto something, would be able to shed some light on systemic issues that have been hidden for decades, and possibly affect some change for the good. I don't see them doing that now, unfortunately.

[BigO]

BLM is a tool used by marxist communists to incite a revolution, just a small part of many pieces being used to topple a nation from within.

If people don't understand the Russian Revolution, they do not have enough knowledge to defend BLM. Those that started the Bolshevik revolution are responsible for what is happening today.

Toppling statues=destroying history

Angering minorities and turning them against a nation = an attack from within.

Blaming white people for the misfortune of everyone else=creating a force to topple a nation.

Saying white terrorism is the greatest threat in America is a lie.

Remember the civil war, a lot of good men died so that others would have freedom but there is no appreciation.

Reparations have been being paid out in so many ways since the 60s but no appreciation for the deeds that were done.

Study history folks, it is being repeated.

I will say no more on this subject.

[BigO]

Are they, though? In the US, more crime is committed by blacks so it would stand to reason that they encounter LEO more frequently (now, if you want to talk about ending the policies which lead to crime, that's another issue) but they're not statistically more likely to be victims of LEO brutality when compared with the rate of brutality against other races per encounter.

This is a good point but if we say it we are called racist, they use labels to keep us quiet.

[bambamm89]

That's not the point. Black-on-black violence is an entirely different issue. It's roots and reasons are different. BLM was originally intended to bring attention to the systematic racism of the justice/police system. (See: Trayvon Martin)

According to their mission statement;
- We vigorously work for freedom and justice for Black people.
-We intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative.

Just not in Chicago I guess.

A major problem is that people choose what to look at when they are facing an issue this big. Black on Black crime was coined as a phrase to belittle the day to day injustices that black people face throughout society. Whenever talks of discrimination or injustice towards black people come up, people wanting to evade discussing the issue always point out black on black crime. It has been proven time and time again, that people are more likely to be victimized by their own community than by others. Another issue with this is that it's only used when black people are involved. You've never heard a comment about white on white crime, Asian on Asian crime, etc.

There are a lot of different programs and outreach groups in places like Chicago that work hard to not only address the issues that Black youth face, but also to bring attention to them and offer real alternatives that can not only save lives, but improve the overall quality of them. People can't look at the worst example and apply that to the rest of the world. There are a lot of issues that lead to the violence that plague cities like Chicago. But sadly, people only look at the results and care little about an issue until it is an issue for themselves.

You asked previously why it's considered racist for you to say "All Lives Matter". I don't think a person is inherently racist if they use this phrase. However, this phrase was coined in an attempt to de-legitimize the Black Lives Matter slogan. The All Lives Matter group only shows up in response to Black Lives Matter, but they've made even less of a effort to explain what it is that they stand for and what they think needs to happen in order to change a system that is so blatantly biased and detrimental. All Lives Matter has yet to actually speak out on any social issues that have needed to be addressed. When church members were killed during their bible study, when a Buddhist temple was the victim of drive by shootings, when a mosque was burned down, when people of Hispanic decent were allowed to be treated as 3rd rate citizens and allowed to be stopped at any point and prove their legitimate existence in this country, when children were locked in cages and subjected to major health issues, when the Asian-American community saw an uprise is hate-crimes after the pandemic, etc. The All Lives Matter slogan and sentiment takes away from looking at real problems and works against actually repairing any of the issues that we as a society face. Whether the people that intend to use the slogan for that reason, that is and always will be it's purpose.

[CUSP82]

You actually believe all that stuff you wrote?

[Johnny D]

A major problem is that people choose what to look at when they are facing an issue this big. Black on Black crime was coined as a phrase to belittle the day to day injustices that black people face throughout society. Whenever talks of discrimination or injustice towards black people come up, people wanting to evade discussing the issue always point out black on black crime. It has been proven time and time again, that people are more likely to be victimized by their own community than by others. Another issue with this is that it's only used when black people are involved. You've never heard a comment about white on white crime, Asian on Asian crime, etc.

There are a lot of different programs and outreach groups in places like Chicago that work hard to not only address the issues that Black youth face, but also to bring attention to them and offer real alternatives that can not only save lives, but improve the overall quality of them. People can't look at the worst example and apply that to the rest of the world. There are a lot of issues that lead to the violence that plague cities like Chicago. But sadly, people only look at the results and care little about an issue until it is an issue for themselves.

You asked previously why it's considered racist for you to say "All Lives Matter". I don't think a person is inherently racist if they use this phrase. However, this phrase was coined in an attempt to de-legitimize the Black Lives Matter slogan. The All Lives Matter group only shows up in response to Black Lives Matter, but they've made even less of a effort to explain what it is that they stand for and what they think needs to happen in order to change a system that is so blatantly biased and detrimental. All Lives Matter has yet to actually speak out on any social issues that have needed to be addressed. When church members were killed during their bible study, when a Buddhist temple was the victim of drive by shootings, when a mosque was burned down, when people of Hispanic decent were allowed to be treated as 3rd rate citizens and allowed to be stopped at any point and prove their legitimate existence in this country, when children were locked in cages and subjected to major health issues, when the Asian-American community saw an uprise is hate-crimes after the pandemic, etc. The All Lives Matter slogan and sentiment takes away from looking at real problems and works against actually repairing any of the issues that we as a society face. Whether the people that intend to use the slogan for that reason, that is and always will be it's purpose.

You're talking about two different things. All lives matter isn't an organization - there is no "they". Black Lives Matter is an organization and the pushback against them is their continued failure to address the real issues facing the people they claim to be fighting for. Instead, they latch onto and exploit fear and victimization. They created red herrings - distractions from the real issues. Distractions such as police brutality and oppression from capitalism. Not that police brutality doesn't exist - it does - but it isn't disproportionate against black men as BLM would have you believe. And capitalism has done more to provide opportunity, freedom and freedom from oppression than any other system. Ever.

While I don't retort with "all lives matter" myself, I understand it as a response. It's a response to say that if you're truly building an organization that is sincere about caring for the lives of black men, prove it in your actions and show us the cause of this victimization so we can all talk about solutions. But if your claim is that black men are beaten by cops and that under capitalism employers can pick and choose who to hire and how much to pay them...... Well, we're ALL in that together.