Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List
 

Here is a link to this page:
http://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.asp?message_group=7260&start_row=1


Downsides of an all black movement vs an inclusive one?

1 - 10
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: CarterBlunt Sent: 12/25/2019 1:52:36 AM
Reply

I was just thinking about the whole Black Lives Matter movement... how smear merchants said "black lives matter" was implying ONLY black lives matter... seems dishonest, but that's what they said. On the other hand, I think the focus of 'black only' organizations makes it easy for a lot of people to just ignore it as not being about them. I remember when there would be a police shooting of an unarmed white guy, BLM was nowhere to be found. A perfect opportunity to show that they are principled about their narrative, and that it doesn't only affect black people... but they just ignore it, which not only reduces exposure for the movement, but also gives credibility to the idea that it's racist. Instead they would go with a divisive protest for a guy that had a gun on him and was actively fighting arrest, and lose most of the population's support. And where the f is BLM now? It's not as if the killing has stopped. I guess the money dried up because there was no one to fund it. The blacks with real money already took their credit and went home, plenty even dissed the movement. The only one I can think of who actually sacrificed for it was Colin Kaepernick, but then all he could do after that was sell out to Nike because they just trashed his career without any consequence. So eventually I start to wonder if the movement was kneecapped on purpose from the beginning.

And I apologize if this has already been beaten to death in other threads.


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 12/26/2019 3:02:04 PM
Reply

No this is still a worthwhile topic for discussion.

The first thing to understand is that black people have been trying different things to various degrees of success. So there are "black only" organizations and there are inclusive ones. For example, the NAACP was started by an interracial group.

But let me tell you a very short story that I was told by the head of one of the Black Wall Street, USA organization. They had an event to promote minority business and people came out to find minorities to award contracts to. Who benefited the most? White women. They are, after all, a "minority".

So I ask you... black people have limited resources. The needs that we have are often lowest on the list for those outside of our community. There are obviously less opportunities for black people. Not all of it is due to racism. Some is due to class-ism. Some is due to the fact that it takes money to make money. And if you don't have money you're not going to be in the social circles of those who do. So this means we have to work together to push ourselves upward. So... why should we spend our limited resources to help someone who we don't see spending their resources to help us?

The thing that really aggravated me about the opposition to BLM was this advocacy of "All Lives Matter". That's a nice thing to say because all lives DO matter, but not only did BLM never say that any lives matter more than others, but there also was an opportunity for ANY of those thousands of outraged white people to start an organization called ALM and raise money and awareness and work for solutions for tackling this issue of police brutality against all races. But outside of a FB page with anti BLM rhetoric, not a single person made any real attempt to do this; to create the thing they accused BLM of not being as if it had a moral duty to be that. For some reason, they couldn't do it either.

And I knew from the moment the criticism started they weren't going to and had no interest in doing so. They just wanted to have an argument against the thing they didn't like so they could be on the moral high ground while opposing what BLM was trying to do and accomplish. It provided them with cover so that they wouldn't have to take a deep look at themselves to see why, regular people just like them, who choose to become police officers, would be more likely to kill black people.

See? White people and black people are not monoliths. And no one wants to be thought of as racist. The problem is that even a lot of racists don't want to be called racist. And instead of identifying with the victims of these racial crimes (which I call killing an unarmed person a crime), they identify with the perpetrators because they see more similarity between themselves and the police than they do with the victims. That is my opinion and I will defend it as such. Some of the same people talking about all lives matter also talk about blue lives matter as if cops are fighting some kind of war and there are casualties on both sides; with black people killing cops.

"Black people" are NOT killing cops. That is a racist thought. Black people do not have meetings, do not have a situation room, do not have a def con 5, do not have any strategic common bone to hurt white people, but that is what many white people think, consciously or subconsciously. They think this because we "should" because of what they did to us and so they fear what we want to do in return. But we're not trying to get revenge for the past. We're trying to protect our future. We want liberty and justice for all. We want equality, fairness, and opportunity. And we fight against those who deny us these things because of their ignorance. If a cop gets killed by a black person that's unfortunate. But its not the work of "black people". That was a choice made by an individual. When a cop uses unnecessary deadly force against black people that is based on implicit or explicit bias that is an individual choice that is racially motivated. And it seems like, to them, the lives of black people have less value. BLM is a response to that. But if there are no consequences to taking black lives how can we correct this thinking that they have less value?

Of course white lives matter to a white cop. You don't need to remind him of that. BLM wasn't a slogan aimed at all of society. It was aimed at those with racist mindsets and mentalities who do not see the worth inherent in black people. This is born out by statistics. You're more likely to get shot if you're black. And its not because black people commit more crime. That's another stereotypical myth designed to create more bias against black people to the advantage of whites.

"Don't employ those nigg*rs. They steal."

Think about that. Who is more likely to steal? A black person with a master's degree, or a black person who can't get a blue collar job because every employer believes he's going to steal from them? If you can't get a job how are you supposed to survive without stealing? Or without public assistance?

"Don't employ those nigg*rs. They're lazy. Look at all the welfare queens."

But again... if you don't employ people how are they supposed to survive without public resources? The same works with the school to prison pipeline. All of these biases add up, not just to a lack of opportunities, but a system of guard rails that protect racists whites from having to see black destroy those stereotypes and prove them all lies.

BLM shouldn't exist, but it does. It does because it was trying to fill a vacuum. The NAACP should have been front and center on every shooting. Where were they? How are they choosing to use their resources? The KKK is pretty exclusive but how often are they railed against by the right wing media? Think about it. It's not like they went out of existence. It's not like they don't have a pro-white (only) agenda. What about the neo-nazis? What about the white nationalists? How often do right wing media pundits blast these groups and tell them that all lives matter? No, everyone always wants to tell black people how to feel, how to live, how to react to oppression. Telling someone they're protesting the wrong way is like telling someone screaming in pain that they're too loud. And when we're told its the same as everyone else's pain it rings hollow because how often are whites relieved when they see the cops arrive on the scene? Black people tend to tense up. I've personally been falsely treated like a criminal suspect before just because I "fit the description". Not a specific description; but his.

No no, its not the same. Domestic violence isn't the same as an assault at a bar. A three point shot isn't the same as a two pointer or a foul shot in basketball. A touch down is not the same thing as a soccer goal. It's different because racism makes it different. And that's what BLM protests. When a white person gets shot, its unfortunate. But they didn't get shot because they were white. They got shot in spite of that fact. That's the difference. So what protest could we do to stop people who are already less likely to get shot, to get shot even less, when they are shot in spite of being white? And if you take out the racial component that makes this type of shooting different, black people will still get shot more often even if you have some kind of globally beneficial effect. So is that acceptable? Is that what black people should be fighting for? Getting shot less but still more than whites for the same offenses? Do you see? Not including you doesn't mean we don't love you. It just means that its not effecting you the same way its affecting us and we don't need to pretend that it is. There were no white groups protesting this on everyone's behalf. Not before, and not after. And that's because whites (as a group) are more likely to side with the white police officer. And how many little white kids get shot in the park by cops because they're playing with a toy gun? How many people call the police on white kids mowing a lawn or selling lemonade or sleeping in a college library or being at a pool party? And its the same thought process that calls the cops on us even when we're innocent... that will shoot us when it suspects we're not.

And that's why "All Lives Matter" wouldn't work for us.


Messenger: CarterBlunt Sent: 12/26/2019 5:10:25 PM
Reply

Yeah, I guess I didn't really think that through. In fact, there is an argument to go economically black only as well. But then you run into the "takes money to make money" problem with creating black businesses.


Messenger: The BANNED Hemphill Sent: 12/27/2019 12:31:41 AM
Reply

BLM is funded by an ACTUAL Nazi George Soros.

And the KKK is universally condemned by true conservatives. Always has been always will be. We have always been against the democrat KKK.

More delusion and confusion from IPX

Watch his replies to this.. Pure libtard brainwashed nonsense


Messenger: Jahcub I Sent: 12/27/2019 10:59:26 AM
Reply

The kkk is up in both parties, the demoncrats and the repubicons. Who you trying to fool? Do you honestly think that the kkk was only supported by one side of the two-sided racist system of the USA?

While some posts on the internet support what you say; history tells a different story. USA history tells the story of both democrats and republicans having members that formed and supported the kkk.


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 12/30/2019 1:52:30 PM
Reply

I have a white friend with black kids and she supports black owned businesses (BOBs) more than probably most black people do because she is conscious of the need for that. So she doesn't "exclude" herself by thinking she can't support the "buy black" movement. Anyone can support these movements. Whites can absolutely donate to BLM if they wanted to. But does that mean they should take the B out of the name?

If you donate money to help get a certain politician elected. Does that politician owe you to vote based on your interests? Or is it your responsibility to pick the person you want to support based on their platform? And supporting that campaign doesn't mean the politician has to make to accept you into his campaign staff. If his name is John Brown then its the John Brown for Senate campaign, not the Everyone Senate Campaign, because John Brown shouldn't only be talking about John Brown but all the people. No, John Brown REPRESENTS the people he's trying to represent, the causes he's trying to represent, the solutions he supports, etc. It's about him and his beliefs. No one thinks he needs to change his beliefs to fit his supporters.

But because its "BLACK"....

BLM is, for some reason, not allowed to be "black", not allowed to be "John Brown", not allowed to have its own interests. This John Brown is expected to equally campaign for others of his political party how want the same position. Is that how it works? Of course not. And it would be ridiculous to expect a campaign, that needs as much money as possible, in order to be competitive, to share their resources with other other candidates who aren't even running and who don't have a campaign.

Again... no one said whites couldn't create an ALM. There's certainly white organizations that are allowed to exist. I mean honestly, before 2016 how often were politicians and Fox news and any other outlets blasting the KKK? When was the KKK shamed out of existence? When were white nationalists shamed out of existence? No, they're allowed to exist and to want certain things and to have an agenda and platform and use that platform to support candidates that appeal to their platform and agenda. No one says the KKK must begin including blacks and Jews. And they're discriminating against blacks and Jews. BLM isn't discriminating against anyone. They're simply saying that we see a very specific problem where more black people per capita, than all other lives that also matter, are being killed by the police and often in unwarranted situations.

And because it is a specific problem the solutions involve specific actions to reduce racism and racial bias from policing. Without a specific problem, you get generic solutions. So can anyone tell me what solutions an ALL LIVES MATTER organization would have produced? What solutions did Occupy Wall Street produce? Trying to turn BLM into ALM would have rendered it useless and completely ineffective. Just for fun, try to imagine what ALM would say to cops and how police departments would try to integrate that new directive.

chief: "Hey guys, apparently, you're killing to many people of all races, religions, creed, and sexual orientation. So we need you guys to cut down on that. Okay?"

officer: "so is it still okay to hate and/or be scared of big black guys?"

chief: "Yep."

surgeon: "So I hear the patient has cancer. Where is it located?"

doctor: "Woah there buddy! We don't like to exclude any of the body because all part of the body matter. So we need to do surgery on the WHOLE body. Geez? Discriminate much?"

surgeon: *facepalm*

You get my point.


Messenger: RastaGoddess Sent: 12/30/2019 2:24:54 PM
Reply

History has proven that anytime non=Afrikans join an Afrikan movement, the priorities, direction and vibe start to shift. White skin priviledge, be it conscious or subconscious, inevitably rears its ugly face.

Yes, there are non-Afrikans of good will, however our daily and ancestral experiences are different, therefore our reality and perspectives are equally different. Sure, we can work together towards a common goal, but the nucleus, the decision making, must be done BY AFRIKANS FOR AFRIKANS


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 12/30/2019 3:17:23 PM
Reply

That's true, and it is, in my opinion, almost always because they fail to understand these racial dynamics. They often do honestly want to help and have good intentions, just like I fully believe Carter has. But there's certain things that just don't make sense to them that we know from experience. They don't have that experience with THEMSELVES as a group, like we do with them. It's like trying to see what's under your nose without a mirror.

We are their mirror because we see them. They see what they believe they look like to the world. And they see each other primarily based on how they see and experience themselves. So it can be hard for them to fathom why whites could be called devils, for example, and immediately take offense, without understanding what the people (around the world) who started calling them that, were reacting to. No one wants to look in the mirror and see a big cold sore.

And we're like "dude, you got a cold sore. You should probably check that out. "

but since they don't want to have a cold sore they're more concerned with the fact we see it, rather than what it means and how they have a problem THEY need to solve; rather than being so concerned that we see it and that we're telling them about it.

And I get it. No one wants to play the role of the "bad guy" in the story. But you have to consider the fact that Hitler felt the exact same way, along with his supporters. So you have to be willing to ask "what are WE (including self) doing? And help the group that you're in to course correct. Rather than pointing fingers at the Jews as if they're the problem for getting put in concentration camps.

The same general mindset is happening right now against Hispanics. Because they're not white, whites feel justified in feeling threatened. But if you think of them as potential Americans who are justified to compete for jobs just like you, then there's no problem. Because this is pretty much how Americans treat Canadians and so when Canadians take jobs that could have gone to Americans, there's no backlash or outrage. Because they're white.

So when white people try to deny this, to the rest of us it's BS. Because why haven't you been talking about Canadians? And if they say, "oh but we were equally against European immigrants as well", but are they still? You can be Polish, Irish, whatever. Today, there's no problem because those are all considered white and therefore considered American even if they still speak their native languages.

The problem is that you can't really stop a person from seeing the world this way if they choose to. The best you can do is try to get them to see other people like they see themselves and help them empathize. And that's what BLM is about. Seeing "ALL PEOPLE" doesn't help them empathize with any one group in particular and that nebulous concept doesn't require anything, especially them, to change.


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 1/2/2020 12:16:08 AM
Reply

There are no downsides
The upside is Freedom and Reparation


Messenger: RastaGoddess Sent: 1/2/2020 4:11:31 PM
Reply

Exactly Ras GA


1 - 10

Return to Reasoning List




RastafarI
 
Haile Selassie I