150 Terrorists invade Oregon

[Stoked]

LOL, so instead of gay rights, it should be "all socially marginalized groups rights?" Or instead of women's rights, it should be "all persons historically oppressed by men rights?" So, advocates of undocumented workers should expand their cause to include all other groups fighting for acceptance and rights in US society? Advocates for battered women are doing wrong by not also advocating for all other physically abused persons? Advocates fighting against child pornography should expand their scope to include all victims of sexual abuse? Advocates for saving the whales must now likewise advocate for all other species threatened by humans?

I'm sorry but insisting on Alllivesmatter, instead of Blacklivessmatter strikes me as, whether intentionally, an attempt to delegitimize or downplay the very legitimate, historical and ongoing issues with race and racism that black people face. Why not allow them to choose their own cause and fight for it (just like you do every other advocacy group)on their own terms without trying to dictate to them the causes for which they should advocate and how they should go about doing it? What is it about Blacklivesmatter that makes so many people want to dictate the scope and terms of their advocacy, when they don't do so for the many hundreds of other special interest advocacy groups?

I can see how that comes off that way. Fair enough. I brought it up as a way to broaden their support. Not a good way? Fine. Plenty of other ways to more effectively spread their message.

For me it's their tone and actions. Not their message. They can do it however they want, rock in. And everyone else can react in any way they choose. They don't have to justify their actions and people don't have to justify their reactions. For or against.

For example: the Denver MLK parade protest today was highly effective. IMO

The S.F. bay bridge protest was highly alienating and damaging. IMO.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

Nor will I allow you to put your ******** interpretations on me. You want to think I mean white people fine. You're dead wrong but don't let that ruin your narrative.

Also saying since I didn't say it so don't imply it isnt aggression.

Oh yes, I've noticed. The minute anyone challenges your fence sitting and points out toxic language you use, maybe unintentionally, you ****ing lose it and then are let off the hook.

I post plenty of stupid **** here, and many call me out, and I enjoy it. I'm just tired of you taking both sides, not taking responsibility for some of the ****ty things you say, and getting pissed when people point it out.
This "how dare you!" schtick you play anytime these issues of race are brought up is annoying and I'm pissed and I'm going to post about it. And imply. And point out why I think you're wrong. Whenever I want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[♪alt13]

The problem with black lives matter is that virtually everybody agrees on that. It's way too affirmative. If they really want to make an impact then their slogan should be black lives don't matter. BLM doesn't challenge anyone and it's too easy to brush aside as a non issue for many people.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I can see how that comes off that way. Fair enough. I brought it up as a way to broaden their support. Not a good way? Fine. Plenty of other ways to more effectively spread their message.

For me it's their tone and actions. Not their message. They can do it however they want, rock in. And everyone else can react in any way they choose. They don't have to justify their actions and people don't have to justify their reactions. For or against.

For example: the Denver MLK parade protest today was highly effective. IMO

The S.F. bay bridge protest was highly alienating and damaging. IMO.

I understand and have no problem with what you're saying. I prefer methods of civil disobedience (for which reason, I'm not as quick to condemn the Burns Oregon protestors, although I still think they're nut cases) over more aggressive, in your face methods. You may be right that other methods would yield better results. I do think, however, that insisting on Alllivesmatter is, in most cases, code speak/dog whistle fodder for people who just fundamentally have problems with black activism.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

The problem with black lives matter is that virtually everybody agrees on that. It's way too affirmative. If they really want to make an impact then their slogan should be black lives don't matter. BLM doesn't challenge anyone and it's too easy to brush aside as a non issue for many people.

I am highly confident that the same people who find issue with Blacklivesmatter would similarly find issue with Blacklivesdon'tmatter. It's not the title they object to, but rather the black activism, which they find threatening for largely reasons of political ideology.

 

[Stoked]

Oh yes, I've noticed. The minute anyone challenges your fence sitting and points out toxic language you use, maybe unintentionally, you ****ing lose it and then are let off the hook.

I post plenty of stupid **** here, and many call me out, and I enjoy it. I'm just tired of you taking both sides, not taking responsibility for some of the ****ty things you say, and getting pissed when people point it out.
This "how dare you!" schtick you play anytime these issues of race are brought up is annoying and I'm pissed and I'm going to post about it. And imply. And point out why I think you're wrong. Whenever I want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's annoying is BS "you must mean this games" that you play.

Thankfully the "average American" has moved far beyond the middle aged white guy in a shirt and tie. Post away and I will call out your BS, as I see it, whenever I want to as well. No difference from what you are doing.

I don't seem to be having a problem with JEJ on the real issues of race.

 

[Stoked]

I understand and have no problem with what you're saying. I prefer methods of civil disobedience (for which reason, I'm not as quick to condemn the Burns Oregon protestors, although I still think they're nut cases) over more aggressive, in your face methods. You may be right that other methods would yield better results. I do think, however, that insisting on Alllivesmatter is, in most cases, code speak/dog whistle fodder for people who just fundamentally have problems with black activism.

I can actually see that and you might have a very good point. It could easily be used as a way to discredit the movement BLM is trying to create. It shouldn't be but when has that every stopped anyone.

 

[babe]

What's annoying is BS "you must mean this games" that you play.

Thankfully the "average American" has moved far beyond the middle aged white guy in a shirt and tie. Post away and I will call out your BS, as I see it, whenever I want to as well. No difference from what you are doing.

I don't seem to be having a problem with JEJ on the real issues of race.

Well, sometimes I've run into this same buzzsaw, Stoked.

If you're really just going be annoyed at the commonplace "you must mean this" game, you're perhaps a bit too thin-skinned for a discussion board where such offerings are stock in trade. You get annoyed at my complaints that you've moved from a good ol' boy down home sort towards a sophisticated neophyte CFR candidate, and when I've tried to haul you back into my camp with insulting taunts you rare up in rage at me. Of course you have every right to your point of view, or to change it, or to try to reach out to and make reasonable compromises and agreements with whomever you like, but I like to tease, too. "insulting taunts" can be sorta fun, or even funny, ya think?

Like people telling me I'm a "conspiracy theorist" when I just know damn well everybody in politics has some kind of project they're working on, or are working to please somebody. Global governance is a pretty widespread ideal nowadays. . . .yah know. Hell, even Game likes the idea. One downright genuine American red white and blue, loyal to the hilt naval service proud to be involved sort of citizen.

The frozen "patriots" at the bird refuge are just as loyal Americans who just want another sort of schema for governance, more like the old ideals of independence and local rule is the better rule idea.

It doesn't seem to be apparent to them that even back in Andrew Jackson's days, the lust for land drove patriotic Americans to seize Indian lands like the Cherokee Nation with very little serious reflection about the rights of others. It takes some higher reason to see how actually better ideas of management can fit into the picture sometimes.

I happen to think our fad of "global governance" is about as ignorant, overall, as our federal government was when were put the Indians on their reservations, or pinned the blacks into a dependent socialist way of life and never really did respect their human rights, and some good ol' boys freezing their butts to claim they are better managers than archaeologists and wildlife experts really look pretty stupid, too.

Anyone willing to think twice, anymore?

 

[♪alt13]

I am highly confident that the same people who find issue with Blacklivesmatter would similarly find issue with Blacklivesdon'tmatter. It's not the title they object to, but rather the black activism, which they find threatening for largely reasons of political ideology.

I don't think that they(BLM) clearly illustrate what the problem is. Many white Americans agree that black lives matter but they don't see that the system is "rigged' against black people. I am not so cynical as to believe that everybody that brushes off BLM is racist. I think that more often than not they are simply oblivious to the systemic issues we have yet to overcome.

 

[Stoked]

Well, sometimes I've run into this same buzzsaw, Stoked.

If you're really just going be annoyed at the commonplace "you must mean this" game, you're perhaps a bit too thin-skinned for a discussion board where such offerings are stock in trade. You get annoyed at my complaints that you've moved from a good ol' boy down home sort towards a sophisticated neophyte CFR candidate, and when I've tried to haul you back into my camp with insulting taunts you rare up in rage at me. Of course you have every right to your point of view, or to change it, or to try to reach out to and make reasonable compromises and agreements with whomever you like, but I like to tease, too. "insulting taunts" can be sorta fun, or even funny, ya think?

Like people telling me I'm a "conspiracy theorist" when I just know damn well everybody in politics has some kind of project they're working on, or are working to please somebody. Global governance is a pretty widespread ideal nowadays. . . .yah know. Hell, even Game likes the idea. One downright genuine American red white and blue, loyal to the hilt naval service proud to be involved sort of citizen.

The frozen "patriots" at the bird refuge are just as loyal Americans who just want another sort of schema for governance, more like the old ideals of independence and local rule is the better rule idea.

It doesn't seem to be apparent to them that even back in Andrew Jackson's days, the lust for land drove patriotic Americans to seize Indian lands like the Cherokee Nation with very little serious reflection about the rights of others. It takes some higher reason to see how actually better ideas of management can fit into the picture sometimes.

I happen to think our fad of "global governance" is about as ignorant, overall, as our federal government was when were put the Indians on their reservations, or pinned the blacks into a dependent socialist way of life and never really did respect their human rights, and some good ol' boys freezing their butts to claim they are better managers than archaeologists and wildlife experts really look pretty stupid, too.

Anyone willing to think twice, anymore?

Thinking twice is good for everyone on just about everything lol.

On your thin skinned comment, I don't think so. But it is certainly possible on this issue. This exact scenario of "you must mean this" on the race issue is my pet peeve is all. I won't go quietly on it. I like Babypetterz as a poster. I don't have hard feelings towards him at all. Our different outlooks and viewpoints are as valuable as anyone elses.

On your side topic of "global governance". it sounds great in theory. A united human race, that sounds awesome. But the practice would leave alienated groups planet wide. Simply to many current issues with to many stances to work IMO.

 

[Miggs]

I'm white and 40 years old. I've had the privilege of growing up and living in many areas in New Jersey which is a very diverse state. My high school was about 40% black, 40% white, and 20% Hispanic. It is generally listed in the bottom 10% of high schools in the state of New Jersey. My best friend in HS was Puerto Rican and my other two closest friends were each black and white. I say that not as a badge of honor but rather to provide some background on myself.

My issue with blacklivesmatter and other such affiliations is their immediate, blind support for any black "victim." Sorry but Michael Brown, the kid from Missouri, was a scumbag who robbed from a store, pushed the store owner to the ground, and was later shot and killed when he was too stupid to follow procedures, essentially, as I see it, based on what I've read. This blind support, for someone I see as a POS, delegitimizes any activism of substance blacks could stir up. It is divisive and drives a wedge deeper between racial lines.

Trayvon Martin, a victim imo. Eric Garner, a victim imo. Freddie Gray, a victim imo. I'm not saying those people were angels (who is?) but Zimmerman and police in the respective instances seemed to step far outside the law and should've been held accountable. Many other instances are like this as well imo.

But in short, I feel the blind support (by blacks) for every black person who is killed to be disgusting. Each case and instance needs to be looked at individually and I feel like blacklivesmatter and other such groups don't.

And let's be honest, most of those groups are money makers for a bunch of black "leaders" looking to take advantage of their own kind, which is even more disgusting imo.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Excellent post. IMO, #alllivesmatter. I don't believe you can solve these sorts of problems by embracing victimhood or creating divisiveness. It's much better to send the message that we care about our lives, and we care about your life too.

Oh God.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I'm white and 40 years old. I've had the privilege of growing up and living in many areas in New Jersey which is a very diverse state. My high school was about 40% black, 40% white, and 20% Hispanic. It is generally listed in the bottom 10% of high schools in the state of New Jersey. My best friend in HS was Puerto Rican and my other two closest friends were each black and white. I say that not as a badge of honor but rather to provide some background on myself.

My issue with blacklivesmatter and other such affiliations is their immediate, blind support for any black "victim." Sorry but Michael Brown, the kid from Missouri, was a scumbag who robbed from a store, pushed the store owner to the ground, and was later shot and killed when he was too stupid to follow procedures, essentially, as I see it, based on what I've read. This blind support, for someone I see as a POS, delegitimizes any activism of substance blacks could stir up. It is divisive and drives a wedge deeper between racial lines.

Trayvon Martin, a victim imo. Eric Garner, a victim imo. Freddie Gray, a victim imo. I'm not saying those people were angels (who is?) but Zimmerman and police in the respective instances seemed to step far outside the law and should've been held accountable. Many other instances are like this as well imo.

But in short, I feel the blind support (by blacks) for every black person who is killed to be disgusting. Each case and instance needs to be looked at individually and I feel like blacklivesmatter and other such groups don't.

Prosecution is NOT supposed to take into account the personalities of citizens. It is supposed to offer swift, PROPORTIONATE, and JUST responses to offenses committed by citizens.

It doesn't matter if Brown was a piece of ****-- the fact of the matter is that he was dealt with differently than other white "pieces of ****" purely because of skin colour.


The cards are stacked against the black people of America. That's what BLM is about. And saying ALM delegitimizes this card-stacking.

And let's be honest, most of those groups are money makers for a bunch of black "leaders" looking to take advantage of their own kind, which is even more disgusting imo.

Link? Names?

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I'm white and 40 years old. I've had the privilege of growing up and living in many areas in New Jersey which is a very diverse state. My high school was about 40% black, 40% white, and 20% Hispanic. It is generally listed in the bottom 10% of high schools in the state of New Jersey. My best friend in HS was Puerto Rican and my other two closest friends were each black and white. I say that not as a badge of honor but rather to provide some background on myself.

My issue with blacklivesmatter and other such affiliations is their immediate, blind support for any black "victim." Sorry but Michael Brown, the kid from Missouri, was a scumbag who robbed from a store, pushed the store owner to the ground, and was later shot and killed when he was too stupid to follow procedures, essentially, as I see it, based on what I've read. This blind support, for someone I see as a POS, delegitimizes any activism of substance blacks could stir up. It is divisive and drives a wedge deeper between racial lines.

Trayvon Martin, a victim imo. Eric Garner, a victim imo. Freddie Gray, a victim imo. I'm not saying those people were angels (who is?) but Zimmerman and police in the respective instances seemed to step far outside the law and should've been held accountable. Many other instances are like this as well imo.

But in short, I feel the blind support (by blacks) for every black person who is killed to be disgusting. Each case and instance needs to be looked at individually and I feel like blacklivesmatter and other such groups don't.

And let's be honest, most of those groups are money makers for a bunch of black "leaders" looking to take advantage of their own kind, which is even more disgusting imo.

The problem I've found is that you have to be extreme to get results. Sierra Club, NRA, PETA, all of them have to be extreme in their measures to get their message across. Leaks into political parties nowadays. I wish individual cases would be looked at more and appeals to idealism less rampant.

Problem for the Bundy thing is they're almost all in on what they're doing. Yeah, they got their message across, but some of their rhetoric really backs them into a corner.

 

[Miggs]

Prosecution is NOT supposed to take into account the personalities of citizens. It is supposed to offer swift, PROPORTIONATE, and JUST responses to offenses committed by citizens.

It doesn't matter if Brown was a piece of ****-- the fact of the matter is that he was dealt with differently than other white "pieces of ****" purely because of skin colour.


The cards are stacked against the black people of America. That's what BLM is about. And saying ALM delegitimizes this card-stacking.



Link? Names?

I can't respond as in full as if like but I'll say this. I'm not taking into account personalities. I'm taking into account actions because that's all that matters and Michael Brown's actions warranted violent police reaction.

The other cases I referred to did not.

Whether or not the cards are stacked against blacks is a completely different topic (albeit an important one) than what I've referred to here.

As far as blacklivesmatter and the ilk, look up Shaun King. He's just one example of the advantageous leeches who show up when cases like those mentioned come into the public eye.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I don't think that they(BLM) clearly illustrate what the problem is. Many white Americans agree that black lives matter but they don't see that the system is "rigged' against black people. I am not so cynical as to believe that everybody that brushes off BLM is racist. I think that more often than not they are simply oblivious to the systemic issues we have yet to overcome.

I believe in my opening post on this topic I stated that it is difficult to separate out the racism, both explicit and implicit, from this debate. I conceded that not all who brush of BLM are racist, but many of them are (or are acting in good faith unaware of their implicit racial biases) and the backlash to it has become so infused with racist codewords/dogwhistle rhetoric, that it's hard to separate wheat from chaff.

 

[fishonjazz]

It doesn't matter if Brown was a piece of ****-- the fact of the matter is that he was dealt with differently than other white "pieces of ****" purely because of skin colour.

This paragraph seems like you are saying that cops never shoot white pieces of **** or treat them rougher than necessary.

That would be incorrect

 

[Deleted member 848]

This paragraph seems like you are saying that cops never shoot white pieces of **** or treat them rougher than necessary.

That would be incorrect

not that they never do-- but one group of people deals with this statistically higher than the other. For no reason other than racism, quite frankly.

 

[fishonjazz]

not that they never do-- but one group of people deals with this statistically higher than the other. For no reason other than racism, quite frankly.

True

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I'm white and 40 years old. I've had the privilege of growing up and living in many areas in New Jersey which is a very diverse state. My high school was about 40% black, 40% white, and 20% Hispanic. It is generally listed in the bottom 10% of high schools in the state of New Jersey. My best friend in HS was Puerto Rican and my other two closest friends were each black and white. I say that not as a badge of honor but rather to provide some background on myself.

My issue with blacklivesmatter and other such affiliations is their immediate, blind support for any black "victim." Sorry but Michael Brown, the kid from Missouri, was a scumbag who robbed from a store, pushed the store owner to the ground, and was later shot and killed when he was too stupid to follow procedures, essentially, as I see it, based on what I've read. This blind support, for someone I see as a POS, delegitimizes any activism of substance blacks could stir up. It is divisive and drives a wedge deeper between racial lines.

Trayvon Martin, a victim imo. Eric Garner, a victim imo. Freddie Gray, a victim imo. I'm not saying those people were angels (who is?) but Zimmerman and police in the respective instances seemed to step far outside the law and should've been held accountable. Many other instances are like this as well imo.

But in short, I feel the blind support (by blacks) for every black person who is killed to be disgusting. Each case and instance needs to be looked at individually and I feel like blacklivesmatter and other such groups don't.

And let's be honest, most of those groups are money makers for a bunch of black "leaders" looking to take advantage of their own kind, which is even more disgusting imo.

Of Brown's many 'sins' you recite, which merited him being killed?

The problem is that there are many people who, essentially, see Michael Brown as representing their caricature of what they think a black person is--a thug, or most likely thug, who, if he didn't strictly deserve to die, at least deserves some due comeuppance, so if he is killed unjustly, meh. This is precisely one of the things black activists are trying to bring to the public's attention.

Brown is as much a victim of the others. If his punishment for his crimes were imprisonment or something more or less appropriate for the severity of his crimes, then he is not a victim. But nothing he did merited death, thus he IS a victim. Frankly, moreover, I strongly suspect that Brown's shooting was not unrelated to the culture of racism that permeates the Ferguson police force. One can legitimately question whether, if he were not black, he would be dead.

No doubt there are race hustlers among the black community, just like there are outrage entrepreneurs related to just about any social issue. Does it bother you more when the issue is black activism, or is this a concern you apply to other groups/causes as well?