Protests following the killing of George Floyd

sammsky1 said:
Eminent British Historian David Starkey says slavery in USA wasn't a genocide, as blacks are still alive in USA.
And British Empire was the most important event in human history.

Click to expand...

Greece was way more important than the BE, they stopped the Persians from invading Europe and we can say the Western civilization exist because them... take that Merkel.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
Bloody hell, guy has assault rifle? Love for weapons in USA is crazy.
But what do you expect from this women? Angry mob broke down into their home and she is alone with her husband.
I can't believe that some people are defending mob (these people are not protesters) in this situation. I am family person. My wife and my kid are the most important persons in my life. If i was in place of this man i don't think that i would react this calmly like he did.
Click to expand...
They weren’t on private property, you can actually see the pavement in the picture with the crazy chick with a gun. These people were walking to the mayor’s house past these idiot’s house.
 
calodo2003 said:
Yeah. Those wheel & fire discoveries were just happy accidents. Would have happened regardless.
Click to expand...

I thought that it was a silly take and therefore didn't bother with it. But how can an historian make that comment and not be hounded? Did he forgot the inventions of writing, agriculture, irrigation or tools?
 
JPRouve said:
I thought that it was a silly take and therefore didn't bother with it. But how can an historian make that comment and not be hounded? Did he forgot the inventions of writing, agriculture, irrigation or tools?
Click to expand...
Printing press, brewing, etc., etc.

Shocking statement from someone as purportedly learned as him
 
Huge group of armed Black protesters march on Confederate monument in Georgia



 
FireballXL5 said:
Just enjoying their beautiful 2nd amendment, what's the problem? Oh, I see.........
Click to expand...

Pretty much although they cross the line when they're videoed charging up to drivers, describing themselves as a "black militia" and the drivers "worst nightmare" while ranting about his ancestors and reparations. Essentially they're the same utter arseholes that you'll see when the "white militias" storm capitol buildings ranting about freedom.

Regardless of white, black, left or right, the obsession with militias in the US is extremely disturbing.
 
I'm presuming the BLM painting was approved by officials while this was an act of property destruction without a permit. Presuming they'll be found out and cited.
 
America really is going to self destruct soon. While it's great to see the armed black folk marching about to counter off the redneck groups, I'd dread to think what would potentially happen if both groups end up in the same location.

Ideally the image kicks gun reform into action, as it is no longer "their guys" with the guns, but I can see the greed taking place, and gun sales going up. Which of course Trump would claim as a win as it is stimulating the economy.
 
Pink Moon said:
Pretty much although they cross the line when they're videoed charging up to drivers, describing themselves as a "black militia" and the drivers "worst nightmare" while ranting about his ancestors and reparations. Essentially they're the same utter arseholes that you'll see when the "white militias" storm capitol buildings ranting about freedom.

Regardless of white, black, left or right, the obsession with militias in the US is extremely disturbing.
Click to expand...

It is, god forbid those testosterone driven males bump into each other and accidentally fires a shot it could get very very ugly.
 
FireballXL5 said:
Just enjoying their beautiful 2nd amendment, what's the problem? Oh, I see.........
Click to expand...
Hilarious isn’t it, see, I remember that video where there was a big line of white protesters with large guns to the side of the BLM march, that was perfectly fine.
 
Really great article from Nesrine Malik in the The Guardian today discussing how he feels that the Black Lives Matter 'movement' has reached that sticky point that always seems to follow the easy part of the public having outrage for something that is plainly outrageous and easily understood, the protests that they can get behind, but then the difficult part comes when the change in our lives is required to push or pull through any real progress.

But when it comes to the underlying injustice – to making the links between the deportation and death of a Windrush citizen, the NHS worker impoverished by Home Office fees and unsettled by cruel hostile environment policies, the unelected special adviser breaking lockdown rules, and the political party we keep voting in – we’re not so good.

The same is now happening with the Black Lives Matter movement. Everyone is on board with the principle, but when it comes to the change that is required, the idealistic passengers the movement picked up along the way suddenly come down with a case of extreme pragmatism.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/black-lives-matter-protests-change-demands - Free to View.
 
Nesrine Malik said:
the idealistic passengers the movement picked up along the way suddenly come down with a case of extreme pragmatism.
Click to expand...
To me, this is significant (and that's putting it kindly). Is this pragmatism a legacy of a societal power structure historically dominated by white folks? Why, in general and also specifically, is it that people who protest for change are expected to be utterly perfect in their protesting behaviour? Why is it that they are simultaneously criticised for not being a) solely focused on their named cause, and b) also criticised for not protesting beyond that cause and speaking up on behalf of other groups? These are suspiciously high standards being set for them...one might think people are looking for the first convenient opportunity to dismiss the movement. I'm not claiming that those 'concerned' people are all racists (though, as in any sample, some might be); I'm claiming that this discernment in quite rare in public life, so it's arguably telling that BLM in particular attracts that discernment.
 
SteveJ said:
To me, this is significant (and that's putting it kindly). Is this pragmatism a legacy of a societal power structure historically dominated by white folks? Why, in general and also specifically, is it that people who protest for change are expected to be utterly perfect in their protesting behaviour? Why is it that they are simultaneously criticised for not being a) solely focused on their named cause, and b) also criticised for not protesting beyond that cause and speaking up on behalf of other groups? These are suspiciously high standards being set for them...one might think people are looking for the first convenient opportunity to dismiss the movement. I'm not claiming that those 'concerned' people are all racists (though, as in any sample, some might be); I'm claiming that this discernment in quite rare in public life, so it's arguably telling that BLM in particular attracts that discernment.
Click to expand...

That is a good point (b) is often the first criticism while (a) is the criticism aimed later. For example, it's apparently not possible to be anti racist and socialist but it's also not correct to be anti racist and ignore economic discrimination. Some of the most vocal "systemic racism doesn't exist" folks have rightfully pointed to the fact that a lot of issues that we see today are economic but they can't understand why trained Marxists are among the people involved in these BLM movements.
 
SteveJ said:
To me, this is significant (and that's putting it kindly). Is this pragmatism a legacy of a societal power structure historically dominated by white folks? Why, in general and also specifically, is it that people who protest for change are expected to be utterly perfect in their protesting behaviour? Why is it that they are simultaneously criticised for not being a) solely focused on their named cause, and b) also criticised for not protesting beyond that cause and speaking up on behalf of other groups? These are suspiciously high standards being set for them...one might think people are looking for the first convenient opportunity to dismiss the movement. I'm not claiming that those 'concerned' people are all racists (though, as in any sample, some might be); I'm claiming that this discernment in quite rare in public life, so it's arguably telling that BLM in particular attracts that discernment.
Click to expand...
I'm not in the UK at the moment and to tell the truth not really 'in' Society here as such to know what people really feel now. I'm not sure whether there's a clear goal that Idealistic Passengers' can understand and relate to but if there was/is does it become harder for them to see themselves being that committed? That suddenly - oh, life gets in the way, the devotion to an aim needs more than they are ready to give because they didn't really understand the change needed in all our lives and the sacrifices necessary?
 
SteveJ said:
To me, this is significant (and that's putting it kindly). Is this pragmatism a legacy of a societal power structure historically dominated by white folks? Why, in general and also specifically, is it that people who protest for change are expected to be utterly perfect in their protesting behaviour? Why is it that they are simultaneously criticised for not being a) solely focused on their named cause, and b) also criticised for not protesting beyond that cause and speaking up on behalf of other groups? These are suspiciously high standards being set for them...one might think people are looking for the first convenient opportunity to dismiss the movement. I'm not claiming that those 'concerned' people are all racists (though, as in any sample, some might be); I'm claiming that this discernment in quite rare in public life, so it's arguably telling that BLM in particular attracts that discernment.
Click to expand...
Top post.

Protesters for a cause have been painted in far worse light than beach goers during lockdown & people being interviewed this weekend in beer gardens laughing about not social distancing; how strange.
 
I don't feel its negative criticism as such, people also want to know what they are investing in.
 
I just find it incredible that millions rushed to vote for something as economically suicidal as Brexit, with a campaign fronted by known liars of long-established ruthless self-interest, yet suddenly these people are transformed into chin-stroking, ponderous critics when it comes to supporting BLM.
 
SteveJ said:
I just find it incredible that millions rushed to vote for something as economically suicidal as Brexit, with a campaign fronted by known liars of long-established ruthless self-interest, yet suddenly these people are transformed into chin-stroking, ponderous critics when it comes to supporting BLM.
Click to expand...
Lot of money behind the Brexit movement and a sitting conservative government that had the power and position to drive that campaign. In a sense I feel it is taken a bit personally when someone asks where this is meant to go and that otherwise people are becoming inactive at this stage.
 
SteveJ said:
To me, this is significant (and that's putting it kindly). Is this pragmatism a legacy of a societal power structure historically dominated by white folks? Why, in general and also specifically, is it that people who protest for change are expected to be utterly perfect in their protesting behaviour? Why is it that they are simultaneously criticised for not being a) solely focused on their named cause, and b) also criticised for not protesting beyond that cause and speaking up on behalf of other groups? These are suspiciously high standards being set for them...one might think people are looking for the first convenient opportunity to dismiss the movement. I'm not claiming that those 'concerned' people are all racists (though, as in any sample, some might be); I'm claiming that this discernment in quite rare in public life, so it's arguably telling that BLM in particular attracts that discernment.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
Essentially respectability politics - BLM has to have a higher degree of expected behaviour in order to convince people to keep supporting the movement.
With such high barriers to entry for societal change, it's no wonder not much actually gets done.

What then happens is people get to pat themselves on the back for posting a black square, and a few slogans or gestures - but they also feel better about not lending support further than that, or actually taking initiative to do something themselves.
 
villain said:
Excellent post.
Essentially respectability politics - BLM has to have a higher degree of expected behaviour in order to convince people to keep supporting the movement.
With such high barriers to entry for societal change, it's no wonder not much actually gets done.

What then happens is people get to pat themselves on the back for posting a black square, and a few slogans or gestures - but they also feel better about not lending support further than that, or actually taking initiative to do something themselves.
Click to expand...
That's okay then but you're expecting people who usually struggle to think about anyone else to come up with some initiative.
 
oates said:
Really great article from Nesrine Malik in the The Guardian today discussing how he feels that the Black Lives Matter 'movement' has reached that sticky point that always seems to follow the easy part of the public having outrage for something that is plainly outrageous and easily understood, the protests that they can get behind, but then the difficult part comes when the change in our lives is required to push or pull through any real progress.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/black-lives-matter-protests-change-demands - Free to View.
Click to expand...

Is that not normal though?

For one, people relatively comfortable in a system will not be hugely motivated to change it unless personally affected. And the majority are obviously comfortable. Secondly, agreeing with the existence of a problem doesn't mean you agree with the proposed solutions to it and that you shouldn't query the legitimacy of those. Pointing out problems is easy, but identifying a solution that most people can get behind is actually the hardest part to solving a societal problem. Unsurprisingly calls for defunding the police or imposing Marxism to solve systemic racism will be met with apathy or disdain by the majority of people.
 
MadMike said:
Is that not normal though?

For one, people relatively comfortable in a system will not be hugely motivated to change it unless personally affected. And the majority are obviously comfortable. Secondly, agreeing with the existence of a problem doesn't mean you agree with the proposed solutions to it and that you shouldn't query the legitimacy of those. Pointing out problems is easy, but identifying a solution that most people can get behind is actually the hardest part to solving a societal problem. Unsurprisingly calls for defunding the police or imposing Marxism to solve systemic racism will be met with apathy or disdain by the majority of people.
Click to expand...
Perfectly normal, not admirable is exactly what I'm saying but compared to Brexit where existing prejudice is actively encouraged and the only thing to put yourself out over is to attend a polling station it isn't too critical if at all to ask where is BLM going to encourage followers?
 
oates said:
That's okay then but you're expecting people who usually struggle to think about anyone else to come up with some initiative.
Click to expand...

They don't have to come up with some initiative, but having consistent support shouldn't be too much to ask for?
Protests are still happening, petitions are still active, fundraisers still need support, there's plenty of things to research and be a part of - expecting everything to be spoon-fed and readily available while calling yourself an ally or a supporter is paradoxical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.