Black Lives Matter

Halifax2TheMax

Does anyone remember when Darth Cheney had the protest pens set up a mile or so away from the convention center during the 2004 repub convention? To keep all those unwashed Iraq war protestors away from ruffling the repub attendees' feathers? Now, that's the correct way to protest.

Ledbetterman10

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

Halifax2TheMax

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

And yet, changes are happening. More so now than ever. Will they be sustained and effective? Time will tell. But we're already seeing police budgets being diminished and the dollars put toward other things that might alleviate the frustrations. Again, time will tell but at the very least, it seems they got everyone's fucking attention.

PJPOWER

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

So you ARE okay with the protests where half the crowd are carrying AR-15s?  They seem to get quite a bit of attention too...It sounds like you are saying that you are okay with whatever gets public or media attention, however dangerous or disruptive, as long as it aligns with what YOU consider justified causes?  Maybe I’m reading you wrong, and if so, where do you draw the line as to what is acceptable and what is not?

Ledbetterman10

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

And yet, changes are happening. More so now than ever. Will they be sustained and effective? Time will tell. But we're already seeing police budgets being diminished and the dollars put toward other things that might alleviate the frustrations. Again, time will tell but at the very least, it seems they got everyone's fucking attention.

Oh they definitely have everyone’s fucking attention. I still don’t think cutting police budgets will be helpful though. Especially in high-crime areas with a lot of black-on-black crime (Chicago for example). 

But besides seeing police budgets being cut, what else is happening? I ask that seriously because I’m not sure other than stuff like Aunt Jemima being changed. 

PJNB

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

Good cops need to call out bad cops because that is their job to uphold the law wether it is a cop or a civilian and they are failing at this. To put protestors on the same level of responsibility as cops is not a good comparison imo. Protestors do not need to do anything other than peacefully protest. They can not control the vandals and looters. That is the cops job that they signed up to do when they got hired. Also I have seen plenty of cases of BLM leaders and protesters calling out the looters and violence so I am not sure why you are wording as you are. 

mcgruff10

Ledbetterman10 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

And yet, changes are happening. More so now than ever. Will they be sustained and effective? Time will tell. But we're already seeing police budgets being diminished and the dollars put toward other things that might alleviate the frustrations. Again, time will tell but at the very least, it seems they got everyone's fucking attention.

Oh they definitely have everyone’s fucking attention. I still don’t think cutting police budgets will be helpful though. Especially in high-crime areas with a lot of black-on-black crime (Chicago for example). 

But besides seeing police budgets being cut, what else is happening? I ask that seriously because I’m not sure other than stuff like Aunt Jemima being changed. 

Seems like shootings are way up in nyc since Deblasio made some really dumb changes.  
https://news.yahoo.com/rise-shootings-continues-nyc-amid-125608039.html

Ledbetterman10

PJNB said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I think the protesters are a lot like the police. The majority are good. But the bad ones cause chaos and give the good ones a bad name. So similar to how there's a "correct" way to police, there's a "correct" way to protest. Marching with your Black Lives Matter sign? Correct. Destroying property or attacking people? Incorrect. 

Completely incorrect. The police are hired and paid to do a job and the public has the right to expect that every single one of them meets the standards of their profession and upholds the law. There is absolutely no such obligation on the general public, and what's more, the idea that there's a single "correct" way to protest is false and designed to limit the protests to actions that are bound to be ineffective. 

Some of these so-called protesters are really just violent anarchists, and they aren't being called out by anyone that supports the movement. Similar to how the so-called "good cops" rarely-if-ever call out the "bad cops."

You know what else causes protests to be ineffective? When the actions of the protesters make no sense in relation to the cause they're supposed to protesting for. So when they tear down a George Washington statue, or burn down a Wendy's, or turn their neighborhood into an autonomous zone, it turns people off of their cause. You're right to say that people have predictably begun moving on from all of this. The first night, when emotions were running high, and they burned down the Minneapolis police barracks, well, shit happens. But all the violence and property destruction since then has been ridiculous and nobody with any influcence on the BLM side of things says or does anything about it. 

Good cops need to call out bad cops because that is their job to uphold the law wether it is a cop or a civilian and they are failing at this. To put protestors on the same level of responsibility as cops is not a good comparison imo. Protestors do not need to do anything other than peacefully protest. They can not control the vandals and looters. That is the cops job that they signed up to do when they got hired. Also I have seen plenty of cases of BLM leaders and protesters calling out the looters and violence so I am not sure why you are wording as you are. 

I haven't seen plenty of those cases of BLM leaders calling out looters and violence, that's why I'm wording it as I am. 

And it should be the cops' job to control looters and vandals, but they've been not allowed to in a lot of instances. Seattle especially, of course. And sometimes when the cops have tried to restore order, like that instance in Miami a few weeks ago, they're video-taped and shamed for trying to do their jobs. 

brianlux

oftenreading said:

Predictably, but unfortunately, it seems a chunk of people have already moved on from a stance of seeing the protests as being a necessary and valid part of the process of change, to being irritated by disruption, impatient with discomfort and feeling a need to direct others as to the correct way to protest. 

I (and most of us here) have not rejected the validity of much of the recent protests about the horrific and immoral killing of George Floyd.  Your generalization here certainly has little to do with what I said in my post (but admittedly you did not direct you words specifically to me.)   But I'll assume you direct your comments, at least in part to me, so I will respond thus:

You seem to be throwing all protest actions into one giant basket, as if every action of protest is valid and helpful to a cause.  I wonder if you really believe that?  I'd be interested to know how destroying the small business and livelihood of a minority person of color is helpful in improving black lives.  How was the lack of cohesive action, leadership, and organization leading, for example, to the chaos and a quick movement toward random violence in CHAZ useful in helping create a better society?  How violent actions equal in usefulness to the non-violent protest of many thousands of us who were outraged by Floyd's killing?

Irritated by disruption?  Yeah, disruption for the sake of disruption without a clear goal in mind is irritating.  I'll cop to that. Maybe that's because I know what it is to work hard with others with a clear goal in mind to help create useful change.  Mere disruption is more often mindless and aimless.  That's easy.  Anybody can do that.

Impatient?  I've been championing social change and environmental protection for over 50 years and seen little change and I know the difference between a useful, constructive, well organized, hard fought plan of action, and aimless, unproductive chaos.  Damn right I'm impatient.

Feeling a need to direct others? Do you say that because you disagree with what others say?  Personally, I'm more for promoting working together.  I don't voice an opinion as a way of "directing others".    Relax and don't be so defensive.  I'm not telling you what  to do.  I don't think anyone else here is either. 

mcgruff10

See you Stonewall....(my uncle who resides in Richmond sent this to me)

bbiggs

^ I wonder how the anarchy symbols got there. Must be part of the plan to get everyone’s attention. 

RYME

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

RYME

https://youtu.be/vbhFubiFiqg
This is not right wing propaganda this is the reality.

PJNB

RYME said:

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

Can you tell me where I can skip forward to where they talk about republicans suppressing black voters for decades and tolerating racism from large groups that vote conservative? I will watch the whole vid later but am really interested to see what kind of reasoning they make for being ok enough with these issues and they still vote conservative. 

Ledbetterman10

RYME said:

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

I bought it and watched maybe the first half hour. I'll get back to it eventually. I've always liked Larry Elder. 

tempo_n_groove

bbiggs said:

^ I wonder how the anarchy symbols got there. Must be part of the plan to get everyone’s attention. 

When I was 16 and full of venom I was all for some anarchy, not full on because that's just dumb, but that was when I didn't know any better.  Also the Anarchy sign was for us punk rockers.

RYME

Ledbetterman10 said:

RYME said:

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

I bought it and watched maybe the first half hour. I'll get back to it eventually. I've always liked Larry Elder. 

You & brianlux were on a role yesterday with good point after point after point.
You know I don't think we are trying to win an argument.  We're trying to have productive dialogue with some people who have never heard the other side of the story.  And that other side of the story is KEY ito having an honest National Conversation.

Ledbetterman10

RYME said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

RYME said:

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

I bought it and watched maybe the first half hour. I'll get back to it eventually. I've always liked Larry Elder. 

You & brianlux were on a role yesterday with good point after point after point.
You know I don't think we are trying to win an argument.  We're trying to have productive dialogue with some people who have never heard the other side of the story.  And that other side of the story is KEY ito having an honest National Conversation.

If you like Elder, this is a good video featuring Elder written by Dennis Prager and directed by Trey Parker from South Park (about a year or two before they created South Park). It discusses race relations in America. It's pretty good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz1tumZOaqw

RYME

PJNB said:

RYME said:

https://uncletom.com/
Everybody should see this movie.
I watched it two days ago it is extremely well done.  Watch the trailer at least and read summary

Can you tell me where I can skip forward to where they talk about republicans suppressing black voters for decades and tolerating racism from large groups that vote conservative? I will watch the whole vid later but am really interested to see what kind of reasoning they make for being ok enough with these issues and they still vote conservative. 

You are dead wrong that large blocks of conservative voters are racist.  That is one of the biggest lies out there.  You should study the Democratic party a little more than you have historically and currently.

bbiggs

tempo_n_groove said:

bbiggs said:

^ I wonder how the anarchy symbols got there. Must be part of the plan to get everyone’s attention. 

When I was 16 and full of venom I was all for some anarchy, not full on because that's just dumb, but that was when I didn't know any better.  Also the Anarchy sign was for us punk rockers.

As a punk teenager who liked heavy metal, I was no stranger to the occasional anarchy symbol either.  For me, it never symbolized the want for actual anarchy.  It was just a "cool" rock and roll symbol I guess.  With what's taking place today, when I see it spray painted on these statues and monuments, I see that as contradicting the message as to why they want them torn down in the first place.  It weakens the argument that these statues represent and support hurtful reminders of the past.  Wanting to tear shit up for the sake of anarchy is a very different thing.