All lives matter BOOED! Only black lives matter.

Page 22 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,153
55,699
136
Really? Every time there's a BLM event there's "counter protests" happening? Interesting. Other than the occasional skinhead racist group or something like that, I'm not aware of anyone else "counter protesting" such events.

The phrase 'all lives matter' has been used explicitly and repeatedly by people in an attempt to undermine the overall message. I can't honestly believe that someone would try to argue that.

Breast cancer probably does get more money/attention than it deserves compared to other cancers strictly based on cases or medical outcomes simply because of visibility. Does that mean people should boo or jeer when someone says we need to tackle all cancers? Of course not. Only an idiot (or in this case, a racist idiot) would do that.

See above.

I don't 'deploy' any cards, nor do I need anything to "work to my advantage". The bottom line is that the movement has been exposed for its racism, and any chance they had of pushing for actual change that will benefit everyone is circling the drain.

If you think this movement is racist I don't think you have a very good handle on what racism is. I do find it amusing how often conservatives on here attempt to paint racial minorities that are complaining about being oppressed as the 'real racists' though. It happens in basically every thread.

The real racists are the people who are perpetrating the kind of offenses that these people are protesting against. You only embarrass yourself when you try and turn it around.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Why didn't they start this movement years ago with blacks killing blacks 100x more than white cops kill blacks.

You don't think that just maybe cops are trigger happy because they realize they are in violent communities with people that hate them? I know I'd be trigger happy and afraid to do my job at the same time. Might as well stop policing the areas all together and the problem will solve itself.

I don't mind being left out matter fact I prefer to be left alone all together but im poor and atheist. What bothers me is a group that's doing nothing but inciting racism instead of trying to solve the cause of the problem.
There is a tiny germ of truth in that, but three quick counterpoints. First, there is no particular obligation to solve the biggest problems first; one can work on them simultaneously or first solve the easiest problem, or even just first solve the one that irritates you most. Second, demanding that something racially biased be stopped, even if done clumsily, is not actually inciting racism. And third, killing people within a particular group generally makes them hate you more, not less. So to the extent that cops kill black people at higher rates than they kill white people, they are actually making the situation worse for themselves.

You should go to a breast cancer rally and say to them "stop saying we need to fight breast cancer, you're being bigoted against everyone who has a disease that isn't breast cancer. All disease victims matter." and see how that goes.

That way when people there tell you to get lost you can talk about how bigoted breast cancer activists are too.
But absolutely no one is saying stop saying "Black lives matter", merely broadening the scope. The proper corollary would be going to a breast cancer rally and saying "Cure all cancer", to which only a fool would reply "No, we're only concerned with breast cancer".
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,873
6,784
126
I called the Save the Tigers foundation today and told them that all animals matter. They said they agreed and because tigers face a profound threat of extinction, they were focusing there and if tigers are saved a lot of other animals will be too.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
The phrase 'all lives matter' has been used explicitly and repeatedly by people in an attempt to undermine the overall message. I can't honestly believe that someone would try to argue that.

So.... that constitutes "counter protests" in your mind? That others have said "all lives matter" is a better goal to rally around? Again, mental gymnastics to try and justify racist actions.

I do find it amusing how often conservatives on here attempt to paint racial minorities that are complaining about being oppressed as the 'real racists' though.

I don't care what group someone belongs to, minority/majority, it's not relevant. If something is racist, it's racist irrespective of what group they belong to. Racism in the name of fighting racism is not magically turned into something else. It's still racism.

The real racists are the people who are perpetrating the kind of offenses that these people are protesting against.

Ah, the old "hey, other cars were speeding too officer!" logic. Whether the actions of others are racist or not has no bearing on whether your actions are racist or not.

Not only is it wrong, but in this case, it's also stupid because by actively excluding everyone else from the movement, they are torpedoing their own goals.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
This is the most basic breakdown of the logic used in this thread:

I feel like I am right >> therefore I am right
I am louder >> therefore I am right
I present myself more confidently >> therefore I am right

Take the comment said last night mentioning those who BOOED did so because they felt their concerns were being whitewashed.

I feel like I'm being ignored >> therefore I am being ignored


or from the Ferguson incident:
Some people feel that Brown was unjustly killed >> therefore Brown was unjustly killed, and anything and everything we can do to peel away what we believe are layers of deception oppressing us, is fully justified because we are right.



Some people who are racist say "All lives matter"
You say "All lives matter"
Therefore I feel you are racist
Therefore you are racist (or at least a racism enabler if you call me out on my attack)

False logic through and through. It really does beg the question what the point of all this is.

I feel your motivation is to ignore me and my feelings >> therefore your motivation is to ignore me and my feelings
(and perhaps) The louder I am >> the harder it is to continue to ignore me

:p



Sure "the other side" has these exact same faults too, I more or less just sit in the middle observing the ping-pong match, commenting once in a while when someone uses wrong logic, and then experience a much wider backlash that perplexes me :D

Seriously, though, and this is the point that someone needs to realize, between the two extremes, usually if I'm criticizing a post, it's usually because I want that person and his/her views to be better in the future because I want those general overall goals to be the one that wins in the end. I just feel the approach has flaws or do not approve of a particular "means", not believing it is justified by the ends. If you weren't such a dishonest asshole to everyone around you, you might just actually be able to improve the world.
 
Last edited:

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Two problems:

1. You missed the point. This thread is not about the optimal allocation of police violence protest resources.

2. Can you provide me with any evidence whatsoever that the sum total of anti-police violence resources is being improperly allocated by the black lives matter movement? You're going to need to account for both the allocation of those resources as well as the dynamic nature of mass movements like this drawing in new resources that would not otherwise be used.

And you fail to understand the point. If All Lives Matter is racist, and the only thing we're allowed to champion is Black Lives, then the movement just lost a huge source of potential resources. It's not that it's misallocated. It doesn't exist at all, because the movement is intentionally exclusionary.

You want to change police behavior? Try including everyone and you'll get lots of social pressure. Want to just limit it to Black Lives, and not white or brown or any other lives that affected by bad cops? Then good luck getting the police, who you've already asserted do not care about Black Lives, to listen to your grievances.

So yes, it's a movement destined for failure, because it's ignorant and exclusionary.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
The phrase 'all lives matter' has been used explicitly and repeatedly by people in an attempt to undermine the overall message. I can't honestly believe that someone would try to argue that.

So the inclusionary phrase All Lives Matter undermines the exclusionary phrase Black Lives Matter?

If police killings decreased across the board by 50%, what color people will be the largest beneficiary?

Goddam, liberalism is swirling the toilet boil right along with conservatism.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,666
17,270
136
Or it looks like this:

This is the most basic breakdown of the logic used in this thread:

I feel like I am right >> therefore I am right
I am louder >> therefore I am right
I present myself more confidently >> therefore I am right

Take the comment said last night mentioning those who BOOED did so because they felt their concerns were being whitewashed.

I feel like I'm being ignored >> therefore I am being ignored


or from the Ferguson incident:
Some people feel that Brown was unjustly killed >> therefore Brown was unjustly killed, and anything and everything we can do to peel away what we believe are layers of deception oppressing us, is fully justified because we are right.



Some people who are racist say "All lives matter"
You say "All lives matter"
Therefore I feel you are racist No one is saying this but there is at least one poster here saying that because the BLM movement isn't saying all lives matter that it's a racist movement.
Therefore you are racist (or at least a racism enabler if you call me out on my attack)

False logic through and through. It really does beg the question what the point of all this is.
Its a distraction and as I mentioned earlier, it's a tactic used by opponents to weaken a movement.

I feel your motivation is to ignore me and my feelings >> therefore your motivation is to ignore me and my feelings
(and perhaps) The louder I am >> the harder it is to continue to ignore me

:p



I more or less just sit in the middle observing the ping-pong match, commenting once in a while when someone uses wrong logic, and then experience a much wider backlash that perplexes me :D
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,666
17,270
136
So the inclusionary phrase All Lives Matter undermines the exclusionary phrase Black Lives Matter?

If police killings decreased across the board by 50%, what color people will be the largest beneficiary?

Goddam, liberalism is swirling the toilet boil right along with conservatism.

Lol! You could eliminate 100% of police killings and you could still have a systemic problem with black people being un proportionally targeted by the police. If you don't understand this then I suggest you just leave this thread before you embarrass yourself even more.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,447
216
106
A all lives matter is not racist it is however a watering down of the message that blacks are disproportionately targeted by police
B Politicians by trying to be everything to everyone and co-opting a grassroots message derived from a backlash to recent situations come across as self serving or socially inept.

Its not all lives don't matter because they do, its about shining, again, the spotlight on social ills despite Fox news and certain branches of government declaring racism dead
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
I called the Save the Tigers foundation today and told them that all animals matter. They said they agreed and because tigers face a profound threat of extinction, they were focusing there and if tigers are saved a lot of other animals will be too.

So if Minnesota Dentist Poaching Club is killing lions, tigers, and elephants, is it better to:

A. Save The Tigers, Lions Forever and We Love Elephants organizations to each fight their own little battle, but only focus on their favorite animals

or

B. Pool their resources to fight poaching in general

How did "liberals" go from smart to stupid so quickly? What happened to the idea of unions and solidarity?

"What do you mean mother fucker??? Only Electricians Lives Matter, you plumbers and carpenters can get bent."
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,640
33,214
136
Probably, but no one stood up and said "White lives matter". What was booed was "All lives matter". It was an attempt to be inclusive, not an attempt to change the subject to the plight of white people.


Well said, sir. There is a very strong tendency, especially on the progressive left, to insist that every issue is black and white. This is very seldom the case as there are usually good arguments to be made on either side of an issue, else it wouldn't BE an issue and almost everyone would agree. Sadly, we've seen the historic tolerance of the liberals match and exceed the historic intolerance of the conservatives, to the point that we are usually the more tolerant of diverging views.

Although I reserve the right to call anyone an idiot for the specific arguments they make to support those views. ;)

Agreed and well said, on all of that.

During booing of O'Malley someone shouted "stop generalizing our movement". That was the objection. There was never a suggestion that black lives were the only ones that matter
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
A all lives matter is not racist it is however a watering down of the message that blacks are disproportionately targeted by police
B Politicians by trying to be everything to everyone and co-opting a grassroots message derived from a backlash to recent situations come across as self serving or socially inept.

Its not all lives don't matter because they do, its about shining, again, the spotlight on social ills despite Fox news and certain branches of government declaring racism dead
FoX News and certain branches of government have declared racism dead? This is news to me. Links?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,666
17,270
136
A all lives matter is not racist it is however a watering down of the message that blacks are disproportionately targeted by police
B Politicians by trying to be everything to everyone and co-opting a grassroots message derived from a backlash to recent situations come across as self serving or socially inept.

Its not all lives don't matter because they do, its about shining, again, the spotlight on social ills despite Fox news and certain branches of government declaring racism dead

I as well as others have said this same thing and yet it some how means we think saying all lives matter is racist. I'm not sure where that came from, can anyone point to a post where that was explicitly stated?
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
This message is hidden because ivwshane is on your ignore list. I logged out for a second to see if you were responding to my question to desy...and sure enough you did. You apparently forgot that I put you on ignore a few months back...please don't respond to my posts.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
The phrase 'all lives matter' has been used explicitly and repeatedly by people in an attempt to undermine the overall message. I can't honestly believe that someone would try to argue that.

I am sure it has been, but that means very little really. If there are people that use use all lives matter to undermine the message of BLM then so what. The logic behind that is if some people use something as a veil then its somehow wrong. Just think about your position here. If racists used ALM and promote that, then what is the worst that happens? If the logic behind ALM is solid, then let the racists use it. The outcome is that we get equality, and to me thats a win.

Do you believe that a significant amount of people are actually using ALM as a veil?






If you think this movement is racist I don't think you have a very good handle on what racism is. I do find it amusing how often conservatives on here attempt to paint racial minorities that are complaining about being oppressed as the 'real racists' though. It happens in basically every thread.

For anyone who believes that black struggles are more important than other struggles, then it would be racist. I would bet that is not the majority view though, and most think that its about solving a problem that effects blacks so much more than other groups, that its not worth including others. The problem with that is a willful ignorance about the situation we have with police violence. As I explained before, a lot of the situation comes from racism, but I would bet its not the majority.

Almost every report I have come across seems to be more about a power trip vs racism. Those things are not mutually exclusive either.

The real racists are the people who are perpetrating the kind of offenses that these people are protesting against. You only embarrass yourself when you try and turn it around.

No. Anyone who believes that once race is better or worse than another is a racist. I would bet that there are many in the BLM movement that believe blacks are better than others. While that group might not be a majority, they are a part of the BLM movement too. Its not that anyone is pure. That is not hugely important in the scheme of things, but lets make sure we dont delude ourselves into thinking there are clear and pure sides to this.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
This message is hidden because ivwshane is on your ignore list. I logged out for a second to see if you were responding to my question to desy...and sure enough you did. You apparently forgot that I put you on ignore a few months back...please don't respond to my posts.

This is dumb and passive aggressive. If you dont want to talk to him, dont. If you want to ignore him, ignore him. Why would you logout to see if he responded?

Man up.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
This is dumb and passive aggressive. If you dont want to talk to him, dont. If you want to ignore him, ignore him. Why would you logout to see if he responded?

Man up.
Whatever...I've noticed this pattern for the last few months where he immediately posts after my posts and thought that perhaps he doesn't remember that I put him on ignore. But thanks for your concern...as if it's any of your fucking business. Ooops...there I go again with that passive/aggressive shit.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,666
17,270
136
I am sure it has been, but that means very little really. If there are people that use use all lives matter to undermine the message of BLM then so what. The logic behind that is if some people use something as a veil then its somehow wrong. Just think about your position here. If racists used ALM and promote that, then what is the worst that happens? If the logic behind ALM is solid, then let the racists use it. The outcome is that we get equality, and to me thats a win.

Do you believe that a significant amount of people are actually using ALM as a veil?








For anyone who believes that black struggles are more important than other struggles, then it would be racist. I would bet that is not the majority view though, and most think that its about solving a problem that effects blacks so much more than other groups, that its not worth including others. The problem with that is a willful ignorance about the situation we have with police violence. As I explained before, a lot of the situation comes from racism, but I would bet its not the majority.

Almost every report I have come across seems to be more about a power trip vs racism. Those things are not mutually exclusive either.



No. Anyone who believes that once race is better or worse than another is a racist. I would bet that there are many in the BLM movement that believe blacks are better than others. While that group might not be a majority, they are a part of the BLM movement too. Its not that anyone is pure. That is not hugely important in the scheme of things, but lets make sure we dont delude ourselves into thinking there are clear and pure sides to this.

The movement seems pretty clear to me. I'd equate this movement with that of the tea party movement before it was co-opted by the Republican Party. Do you think the message/movement of the tea party has changed since it's inception? I'd argue it has.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/state-of-the-black-union/
 

CitizenKain

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2000
4,480
14
76
I don't care what group someone belongs to, minority/majority, it's not relevant. If something is racist, it's racist irrespective of what group they belong to. Racism in the name of fighting racism is not magically turned into something else. It's still racism.

Again, how is focusing a movement on something that only effects certain people racist? They aren't excluding anyone, they are trying to not have their movement hijacked by people who suddenly want to make it about anything else to water it down.

The only reason I see people getting upset about this are the people that this movement is targetting. Which is people like you, so you look to discredit it.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,447
216
106
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/voting-rights-act-supreme-court_n_3429810.html
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a wide-ranging dissent on behalf of herself and Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, justifying the continued vitality of the Voting Rights Act's preclearance provision.

"The sad irony of today’s decision lies in its utter failure to grasp why the VRA has proven effective," Ginsburg wrote. "The Court appears to believe that the VRA’s success in eliminating the specific devices extant in 1965 means that preclear*ance is no longer needed."
The provision has proven "enormously successful" in increasing minority registration and access to the ballot and preventing a "return to old ways," Ginsburg said. Even in jurisdictions where discrimination may not be overt, "subtle methods" have emerged to diminish minority turnout, such as racial gerrymandering.

However, Kelly’s remarks have another component that must not be ignored. She is flatly asserting that most American companies are harboring racist employees. But didn’t Fox News declare that racism is over? What about these declarations of America’s racial harmony:
•Eric Bolling: I don’t think there’s racism.
•Bill O’Reilly: We are not a racist nation. […] Fair-minded Americans should be deeply offended, deeply offended that their country is being smeared with the bigotry brush.
•Steve Doocy: I don’t know that Barack Obama could have been elected president if he was living in a racist nation.
•Ann Coulter: Unfortunately for liberals, there is no more racism in America.
•Republican National Committee: Today we remember Rosa Parks’ bold stance and her role in ending racism.

There you have it, racism is kaput. And yet Kelly explicitly states that racist emails can be found at all but a few of American companies. So which is it? Has America solved its race problem and embraced its rich heritage of diversity? Or are there legions of bigots firing off offensive messages on business computer networks seemingly free of any shame or concern about being caught?

One more from the religious right for you
On “The 700 Club” today, Pat Robertson addressed the protests that have been breaking out all over the nation in response to a grand jury’s decision not to indict a white police officer for the shooting death of unarmed Missouri teenager Michael Brown.

Robertson said that while “there’s no question” that “African Americans in this society for decades have been subject to discrimination” and that “there has been police brutality in various cities,” that’s all over now and “we live in what amounts to a pretty much even-tempered type of society.”

“Police are very careful in dealing with people, they’re trained to be careful with minorities, and the abuses of the past are pretty much a thing of the past,” Robertson said.

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/23/fox...ships_underneath_conservative_viewing_habits/
In the wake of Dylann Storm Roof’s horrifying act of terrorism in South Carolina, many have pointed to the negative influence of conservative media in incubating right-wing extremism. Bill Maher, for example criticized outlets such as Fox News, The Drudge Report and The Daily Caller for presenting a “twisted view,” in which Black people were taking over the country. These criticisms are not new: Fox News has for years come under criticism for its racially-charged coverage. Just recently, in January of last year, Isaac Chotiner wrote that Fox News creates segments “meant to scare its white audience into believing that African Americans, or Muslims, are out to get them.” Meanwhile, Jon Stewart and Rachel Maddow have both criticized Fox News’s coverage of the Ferguson murder last year.



New data suggests that their criticisms may be correct.

Using 2012 American National Election Studies data to test whether Fox News viewers have distinct racial attitudes, it can be demonstrated that, indeed, these viewers are more likely to reject the reality of structural racism and to endorse negative stereotypes of Black people.
 
Last edited: