Protests following the killing of George Floyd

arnie_ni said:
Seen from a nfl player a young black kid, couldn't be more than 10 was shot dead at the weekend but an unidentified black person.

Why does this not get a similar uproar and discussion?

Im not trying to stoke the flames here, im genuinely asking why does this almost seem accepted?

Obviously i know why there is uproar of police killings.
Click to expand...

Why does what seem accepted?

Nobody accepts that people getting dead is ok.

Use all of your words and make a point.
 
AFC NimbleThumb said:
That’s it folks, racism & oppression is a lie created by ‘the Leftists’.

Close thread./

Click to expand...

Came here to see if there was a post on this already, after reading this news item today. When the guy says "Why don't you guys learn about history, the Emancipation Proclamation Act? You're only free because of our forefathers." - that's just an insane view to hold. So now black people should be grateful to the US for having abolished slavery at some point...?!
SteveJ said:
This is what I was trying to express when I mentioned the legacy of a structure or hierarchy. To me it's the unthinking, soft reflex to a historical legacy of control: in 2020, many are still attempting to shape - even if only by way of granting or withholding approval - the way that Black people can protest. This, I think, is a reflection of how authorities have acted in the past, and how they act now. In past ages, those authorities haven't hesitated to shoot and kill Black protesters; now, such action would draw immense criticism, and so the authorities prefer a more subtle approach (often in terms of more restrained physical action, and by influencing uninvolved people by way of slanted media coverage). A culture that accepted the use and misuse of slaves has 'progressed' to one in which Black people can be deemed 'acceptable' to the rest of us - never truly welcomed though - if they act a certain way. This acceptance-protocol is a spectrum which ranges from expected acquiescence - quietly conforming to the behavioural standards demanded - to the notion that if Black people are not 'useful' (hard-working, entertaining in some way, uncomplaining etc etc) then they are a blot or blight on society, an obstruction on the rails of its well-established smooth maintenance of the status quo; essentially, they are deemed to have the potential to derail the gravy train of power and money. Granted this also holds, to an extent, for protesters of all shade; but because of their past, forced and unchosen roles as mere servants and emblems of both societal insignificance and of slyly-hidden violence, Black people will likely always be the victims of especial scrutiny, suspicion, and glib evaluation.
Click to expand...
These are really awesome posts! I would add, though, that this kind of whataboutism happens very regularly to groups with leftist claims. (Maybe also others, but this is what I notice.) 'If you care about animals, why don't you also care about the working poor?' Replace 'animals' with any cause and 'working poor' with any unrelated other cause. (Also: 'If you're Raheem Sterling, why don't you always comment on any racism happening anywhere?' But that's back in the context you were discussing already.) Of course, many people are defending a cause on behalf of the cause, without being involved themselves. (E.g., animal activists are not animals themselves.) In that sense, it's definitely more nefarious for black people, as they are not even allowed to just talk about their own issues, while the suffering and injustice they have experienced eclipses pretty much anything - as you point out. But I do think it's part a more general reflex of anyone who disagrees with whatever instance of activism.
arnie_ni said:
One of my best mates is black and up until i probably didnt even realise the disadvantages he has compared to me. It just didnt enter my mind because i struggled to comprehend anyone treating another human differently because of skin colour. Its opened my eyes and id like to hope will make me a bettter friend to him
Click to expand...
Maybe not really what you were saying, but this reminded me: I have often heard that being colourblind to skin colours is not necessarily a good thing. It's probably helpful in your own behaviour towards others, but it may cause you to miss that some people are being discriminated against due to their skin colour, because it's not a factor you consider yourself. So we are now thinking that we should not raise our children colourblind, but rather very aware of skin colour and discrimination, so they can actively battle it. (If only through their own behaviour and interactions - but all the same.)
 
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...
Also loved this piece by the way. I think one issue to add is that politics is a lot about image and immediate impact, to ensure you can get elected again. So if there is an issue, fire someone, introduce some patch-up legislation and do some cool speeches - and stop there once you've made your mark. Obviously, that doesn't fix anything in the long run, but addressing the underlying issues means making real change (which will have real opposition) and playing the long game to see its effects play out - none of which helps you get reelected within a few years time.
 
Cheimoon said:
Came here to see if there was a post on this already, after reading this news item today. When the guy says "Why don't you guys learn about history, the Emancipation Proclamation Act? You're only free because of our forefathers." - that's just an insane view to hold. So now black people should be grateful to the US for having abolished slavery at some point...?!

These are really awesome posts! I would add, though, that this kind of whataboutism happens very regularly to groups with leftist claims. (Maybe also others, but this is what I notice.) 'If you care about animals, why don't you also care about the working poor?' Replace 'animals' with any cause and 'working poor' with any unrelated other cause. (Also: 'If you're Raheem Sterling, why don't you always comment on any racism happening anywhere?' But that's back in the context you were discussing already.) Of course, many people are defending a cause on behalf of the cause, without being involved themselves. (E.g., animal activists are not animals themselves.) In that sense, it's definitely more nefarious for black people, as they are not even allowed to just talk about their own issues, while the suffering and injustice they have experienced eclipses pretty much anything - as you point out. But I do think it's part a more general reflex of anyone who disagrees with whatever instance of activism.

Maybe not really what you were saying, but this reminded me: I have often heard that being colourblind to skin colours is not necessarily a good thing. It's probably helpful in your own behaviour towards others, but it may cause you to miss that some people are being discriminated against due to their skin colour, because it's not a factor you consider yourself. So we are now thinking that we should not raise our children colourblind, but rather very aware of skin colour and discrimination, so they can actively battle it. (If only through their own behaviour and interactions - but all the same.)
Click to expand...
I actually think that probably is the case with myself and alot of people. And this whole thing has taught me that lesson.
 
arnie_ni said:
Seen from a nfl player a young black kid, couldn't be more than 10 was shot dead at the weekend but an unidentified black person.

Why does this not get a similar uproar and discussion?

Im not trying to stoke the flames here, im genuinely asking why does this almost seem accepted?

Obviously i know why there is uproar of police killings.
Click to expand...
As many posters have pointed out crime is just crime, not really about colour, while with police killings its about a taxpayer funded institution, who's job is to protect and serve, doing the opposite. They seem to target a vulnerable segment of society, mistreating, ruining lives and killing people in a way that seems deliberate and systemic.
 
@SteveJ, not going to quote a specific post, as you've posted a number of great posts on the subject that have been eloquent and insightful . You should consider doing a book about this.
 
Jaqen H'ghar said:
@SteveJ, not going to quote a specific post, as you've posted a number of great posts on the subject that have been eloquent and insightful . You should consider doing a book about this.
Click to expand...
Thank you, mate, but for a number of reasons I wouldn't dare or presume to do so.
 
JPRouve said:
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.
Click to expand...
Not quite getting this tbh, could you explain how these assumptions work & who you paraphrase there?
 
Synco said:
Not quite getting this tbh, could you explain how these assumptions work & who you paraphrase there?
Click to expand...

The first point is based on the fact that since the beginning BLM movements have been accused by a part of the public of using this topic as a crutch for an other agenda which is a socialist one, that's where conspiracies around Soros begin which has led to a certain amount of people criticizing the movement for politicizing the topic. The second point is based on the fact that the BLM movements and their supporters have been dismissed on the ground that they allegedly don't fight for other causes, when the movement talk about economic inequalities due to systemic racism some are perfectly happy to rightfully point to the fact that other ethnic groups also suffer from economic inequalities and that racism isn't the sole or even main problem. So it's apparently wrong to be socialist when you are anti-racist and it's also wrong to not expand on other social and economic issues.

On a side note you may have interpreted the sentence that you bolded as something said by a single person, that's not what I meant. I meant that both of these ideas coexist.
 
arnie_ni said:
After reading Sara's post i get it.

Its not just as simple as black on black. It doesnt need labelled. Those within close proximity are more likely to be the cause of the crime amongst each other.

Ive never heard the phrase "white on white" because no one is labelling it as a way of detracting from other issues like the phrase "black on black crime" is used, mainly by those that would use the "all llives matter" phrase. Its to distract from the larger problem.

The post villian linked me to and the subsequent replies were educational, as I hoped to achieve by asking the question
Click to expand...

In addition to the "black on black" thing, you should realize that it isn't all about numbers. "Black on black crime" is crime in predominantly black communities, you don't think this topic receives a ton of attention, from all possible sides and perspectives, every single day? Of course it does. Police brutality doesn't.

"Normal" murderers aren't protected, they aren't excused, they aren't venerated. Cops are. In addition, they're wholly different issues with different causes and different solutions. Why protest about water quality in Flint when there are much worse health issues around? Why focus on racism in the mortgage industries when other things have a much larger effect on poverty? Why care about redlining and voter suppression when I'm sure we can find something worse? Why talk about prostate cancer or diabetes when heart disease is still a thing?

It just doesn't make sense.
 
JPRouve said:
The first point is based on the fact that since the beginning BLM movements have been accused by a part of the public of using this topic as a crutch for an other agenda which is a socialist one, that's where conspiracies around Soros begin which has led to a certain amount of people criticizing the movement for politicizing the topic. The second point is based on the fact that the BLM movements and their supporters have been dismissed on the ground that they allegedly don't fight for other causes, when the movement talk about economic inequalities due to systemic racism some are perfectly happy to rightfully point to the fact that other ethnic groups also suffer from economic inequalities and that racism isn't the sole or even main problem. So it's apparently wrong to be socialist when you are anti-racist and it's also wrong to not expand on other social and economic issues.

On a side note you may have interpreted the sentence that you bolded as something said by a single person, that's not what I meant. I meant that both of these ideas coexist.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I get what you mean now. Yeah, double-binds of that sort are typical for the dismissal of minority movements.

The first one isn't worth any consideration at all. There are aspects to the second one worth discussing, but not when used against the fundamental legitimacy of BLM and similar movements. The idea that a minority has to address all of the world's problems before being allowed to address their own specific ones is ignorant at best, and often just a fig leaf for resentment.
 
There's a video doing the rounds on social media that appears to show two cops killing a man in custody inside a squad car, think it was. One is holding the man's nose closed shut, the other has a baton/rod shoved in the man's mouth.
 
MrMarcello said:
There's a video doing the rounds on social media that appears to show two cops killing a man in custody inside a squad car, think it was. One is holding the man's nose closed shut, the other has a baton/rod shoved in the man's mouth.
Click to expand...
Pardon me.

Redcafe assemble & post the video.
 
HOLY SHIT! I don’t know if it’s been mentioned at all here but I was just recommended “Blindspotting” on Netflix. A brilliant piece of work that sheds a light on the situation we’re finding ourselves in. I loved this quote, characters speaking about the face/vase optical illusion, but completely about inherent systemic racism...

Why "blindspotting?"

Cause it's all about how you can look at something and there can be another thing there that you aren't seeing so you got a blind spot.

But if somebody points out the other picture to you, doesn't it make it not a blind spot anymore?

No, 'cause you can't go against what your brain wants to see first unless you spend the time to retrain your brain, which is hella hard, so you're always gonna be instinctually blind to the spot you weren't seeing.
 
arnie_ni said:
I get all that.

But it just seems accepted that black on black crime will happen and no one ever seems to want to do anything about it.

Its not hypocrisy because the 2 are different. But it just doesnt sit right with me, that no one wants to do something about this as well
Click to expand...

Re: the black on black crime point



This is a very long thread, but an extremely well-cited and statistically backed debunking of that myth. I'd encourage everyone to read it. I'd never really known what to say in relation to that point, but it seems as if it's not really a point at all.
 
forevrared said:
Re: the black on black crime point



This is a very long thread, but an extremely well-cited and statistically backed debunking of that myth. I'd encourage everyone to read it. I'd never really known what to say in relation to that point, but it seems as if it's not really a point at all.
Click to expand...


And there is a caveat about these stats, they only represent two thirds of all murders, we don't know who committed the other murders, so the stats could easily be reversed and white on white crime be at the top.
 
Unsurprisingly that looks to be yet another load of disingenuous bullshit from that Coleman Hughes character.
 
In a CBS News interview, Trump described the killing of George Floyd as “terrible.” He was then asked by reporter Catherine Herridge why black Americans are “still dying at the hands of law enforcement in this country.”

Trump replied, “So are white people. So are white people. What a terrible question to ask. So are white people.” He added, “More people, by the way. More white people.”

But a 2018 study showed black Americans are roughly 3.5 times more likely to be killed by law enforcement than white Americans.
Click to expand...
 
5760.jpg


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-by-sculpture-of-black-lives-matter-protester

Well executed, brilliant idea.
 
I’m sure everyone will agree that this statue is history and deserves to remain....
 
Rado_N said:
Fantastic
Click to expand...
Yeah!

Hopefully the local council will not react by taking it down, but given the plinth was empty maybe the people of Bristol could get the chance to approve or disapprove.
 
I guess now there will be a fight to keep it up there. Surely Brexit Britain and the Tory party with its racist and fascist inclinations, aren't going to be happy with the radical, socialist connotations, not to mention the figure herself.
 
The daily mail comments section on the article about the new statue do not disappoint if anyone wants a laugh.
 
That statue is an utter joke. People have disappeared right up their own arses now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.