• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

All lives matter BOOED! Only black lives matter.

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
CitizenKain said:
Republicans and libertarians, both are full of people too stupid to reason with.
Click to expand...
If you can only reason with people who already agree with you, then reasoning is not your thing.

Subyman said:
So you know exactly what I am talking about then. Let's not argue over words.

Its like you didn't read my post. Being a part of the movement weakens it because you then see the movement through your experiences and do not necessarily have to try to understand those that the movement began around.

Its like getting upset at cancer awareness month because it should be "disease" awareness month. It washes out the specifics of that particular group.

Sure you are. Because now the movement includes you. Now you feel a part of the movement. You no longer need to understand the circumstance of the people that started it and what they are trying to draw attention to. Its now a blanket statement that you can yell and then move on and forget about because the core message doesn't affect you day to day.

That doesn't have anything to do with what we are talking about. We are strictly talking about why changing the subject of the movement weakens the movement.

But that is not what this specific movement is about. The movement is specifically about black oppression and value in our society. Changing the subject to everyone draws attention away from their issue. This is supposed to draw attention to the most discriminated against group, so that those that are not subjected to constant discrimination can educate themselves.
Click to expand...
But if the movement is specifically about black oppression and value in our society to the extent that mention of any other race is booed, that is certainly a major disincentive to any other race to care about it. Those protesters are saying "concentrate on me, even when the same bad things happen to you". If we're going to divide ourselves into groups, then I'm naturally going to be more concerned with my group than with the group that is telling me to piss off.

Doc Savage Fan said:
The word "eskimo" is also highly offensive to Inuits as well...but that doesn't seem to phase some of us. :sneaky:
Click to expand...
😀
 
realibrad said:
That is where I got my understanding of your position from.

As for how to deal with racism, I touched on it in post 434. You do it with a scientific argument and logic. For someone to be racist, they have to believe someone is above or below another race because of biology. Anything outside of that is not racism but a form of bigotry. So, the key will be education and knowledge. For the same reason that society has moved on from birth defects as being a sign of a witch or the devil, so to will society move on past race. That does make the assumption that science will not prove that there are differences in race in terms of IQ and mental abilities, but I feel its a safe bet.

I will admit that what I have just said is far from a solution, but it points down the path that I feel will take us to the end. Like I said before, people will find something new, it just wont be about race anymore.
Click to expand...

It is a good plan but it's one that will (assuming it works) work over time but it's not something that will happen right a way which is why I think the issues are separate but equally important issues.
 
werepossum said:
But if the movement is specifically about black oppression and value in our society to the extent that mention of any other race is booed, that is certainly a major disincentive to any other race to care about it. Those protesters are saying "concentrate on me, even when the same bad things happen to you". If we're going to divide ourselves into groups, then I'm naturally going to be more concerned with my group than with the group that is telling me to piss off.
Click to expand...

Spot on.


Many people take the "Black Lives Matter" movement as being about promoting, or elevating, what is perceived to be a devaluing of their lives based on skin color. I have no problem with this, I think it is important.

While others have taken the "Black Lives Matter" movement and treat it as "My problems are so much more important to focus on than your problems, that I have no respect at all for you or your problems." I don't know what the percentage is that treat the movement like this, but I can say without distinction of right or wrong, this group receives the lion's share of media attention.

(And according to "eskimospy logic", because some people use the phrase "Black Lives Matter" in the context of my second example, therefore it is unacceptable for those who believe in the context of the first example to continue using the phrase 😛 )

In the context of the incident that sparked this thread, I would say those booing were more of the second example. Which is why I have no problem what-so-ever with someone replying with a reminder that everyone is equally important.
 
Last edited:
realibrad said:
Just because racists latch on to something does not mean that all lives matter is the wrong thing to shoot for. There was a time when animal rights was a big thing in the Nazi party, but it does not taint animal rights.

If racists start backing the idea that all lives matter, who loses? I have no doubt that racists try and latch onto things that sound good to hide their racism, but in this case, great. White lives matter is just as dumb as black lives matter in terms of progression.

Its not racist to say all lives matter, even if racists use it. What makes something racist is believing one race is above or below another. Saying everyone is equal is thus not racist. They may have racist goals, but the message is not racist.

What do you think is lost by people promoting equality? I dont mean that in a baiting way. Feel free to PM me and I will respond, but for the life of me I cannot understand the idea of segregating racial solutions.
Click to expand...
Nobody said it is racist to say it, but if you say it you run the risk of people interpreting it as racist, like these people here did.
 
cubby1223 said:
Spot on.


Many people take the "Black Lives Matter" movement as being about promoting, or elevating, what is perceived to be a devaluing of their lives based on skin color. I have no problem with this, I think it is important.

While others have taken the "Black Lives Matter" movement and treat it as "My problems are so much more important to focus on than your problems, that I have no respect at all for you or your problems." I don't know what the percentage is that treat the movement like this, but I can say without distinction of right or wrong, this group receives the lion's share of media attention.

(And according to "eskimospy logic", because some people use the phrase "Black Lives Matter" in the context of my second example, therefore it is unacceptable for those who believe in the context of the first example to continue using the phrase 😛 )

In the context of the incident that sparked this thread, I would say those booing were more of the second example. Which is why I have no problem what-so-ever with someone replying with a reminder that everyone is equally important.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
realibrad said:
I am guessing you are a lot older than I am (29) but I think we both agree that there has been huge improvements in the last 50 years. Talking to people from the 50's and beyond, I learned just how racist people used to be just recently. If we can improve at the same rate, the racism will end a lot sooner than people think.
Click to expand...

yeap. i'm 42. My grandfather was racist. some of the things he would say when we go out amazed me.

The fact my aunt married a Back man really pissed him off.

my dad didn't give a shit. he was my dad's good friend from Vietnam.

I do agree that perhaps it will be faster then we think. it's such a silly thing to use to not like people over
 
dank69 said:
Nobody said it is racist to say it, but if you say it you run the risk of people interpreting it as racist, like these people here did.
Click to expand...

Then they are stupid. If it is not racist, but people believe it is, they are stupid. To be a good politician, you have to know how to navigate these issues, but anyone who felt it was racist is stupid.
 
Mr. King would be so proud. This is such a tolerant movement. 🙄 I agree that the black community is often profiled and there is a law enforcement issue but this BS is really any better? Are these the actions that fix things? More bandwagon BS.
picisto-20150727150305-533526.jpg
 
Last edited:
Angry Irishman said:
Mr. King would be so proud. This is such a tolerant movement. 🙄 I agree that the black community is often profiled and there is a law enforcement issue but this BS is really any better? Are these the actions that fix things? More bandwagon BS.
picisto-20150727150305-533526.jpg
Click to expand...

actions like that just hurt the movement.
 
realibrad said:
Are you trying to say that this was done by anti-BLM people to defame the movement?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/confederate-statues-defaced-charleston-shooting-black-lives-matter/

It seems its not happening in just 1 state. I am inclined to think that this was done by people who support the message. I am not much for conspiracies though.
Click to expand...

It was probably done by people who support the message. Trying to focus on the shitty and illegal actions of a few people is a very very common way to attempt to discredit movements, however.

Funny thing that someone would mention MLK, because he was constantly fighting against attempts to frame individual acts of violence as emblematic of his rights movement.
 
eskimospy said:
It was probably done by people who support the message. Trying to focus on the shitty and illegal actions of a few people is a very very common way to attempt to discredit movements, however.

Funny thing that someone would mention MLK, because he was constantly fighting against attempts to frame individual acts of violence as emblematic of his rights movement.
Click to expand...

Who really knows but I'm pretty sure MLK wouldn't advocate the delivery method of the black lives matter movement as his message applied to all races, all colors. I sure don't see the movement condemning this vandalism as the acts of a few people.
 
Angry Irishman said:
Who really knows but I'm pretty sure MLK wouldn't advocate the delivery method of the black lives matter movement as his message applied to all races, all colors. I sure don't see the movement condemning this vandalism as the acts of a few people.
Click to expand...

I imagine he would be totally fine with it, as his message was basically the same thing: black people matter as much as anyone else. Regardless, my Ouija board is broken so I guess we'll just have to wonder.

As far as the 'black lives matter' movement, they don't really have a centralized spokesperson/authority to condemn it that I'm aware of so I'm not sure how that would work.
 
Angry Irishman said:
Who really knows but I'm pretty sure MLK wouldn't advocate the delivery method of the black lives matter movement as his message applied to all races, all colors. I sure don't see the movement condemning this vandalism as the acts of a few people.
Click to expand...

That part was true but it wasn't his mission advocating equal rights for white people. They already had them.
 
realibrad said:
Are you trying to say that this was done by anti-BLM people to defame the movement?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/confederate-statues-defaced-charleston-shooting-black-lives-matter/

It seems its not happening in just 1 state. I am inclined to think that this was done by people who support the message. I am not much for conspiracies though.
Click to expand...
Maybe. It does seem like the sort of thing that spoiled white kids would do just to show each other how cool they are. But I don't think it's a given. Virtually every case of someone spray painting racial slurs turns out to be the actions of the supposed victim. I don't see why this couldn't be the same. I'm not saying it is, necessarily, but given the history of such things I certainly wouldn't rule it out.
 
werepossum said:
Maybe. It does seem like the sort of thing that spoiled white kids would do just to show each other how cool they are. But I don't think it's a given. Virtually every case of someone spray painting racial slurs turns out to be the actions of the supposed victim. I don't see why this couldn't be the same. I'm not saying it is, necessarily, but given the history of such things I certainly wouldn't rule it out.
Click to expand...

I wont rule it out, but I am leaning toward it being supporters of the movement. I have not forgotten the idiot that carved into her face and said it was the evil enemy political party that did it to her.

Also, MLK was anti-violence so he would not be for vandalism. Old school Malcolm would have before he reformed, but MLK would not. He said it quite nicely too.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.
Click to expand...
 
realibrad said:
I wont rule it out, but I am leaning toward it being supporters of the movement. I have not forgotten the idiot that carved into her face and said it was the evil enemy political party that did it to her.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that example imply that people who were AGAINST the black lives matter movement did this? That woman was attempting to frame Obama supporters for her injury.

Also, MLK was anti-violence so he would not be for vandalism. Old school Malcolm would have before he reformed, but MLK would not. He said it quite nicely too.
Click to expand...

We all know he was anti-violence and vandalism, the question was if he would endorse the BLM message, not this particular act.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top