Do You Support BLM? Netflix and Twitter Execs Do.

They never will.

I never hear this addressed, and when I mention it, people always get mad.

Because of this, blacks will never come to be equal to whites, and while Asians are already at the same tier, I fully expect Mexicans to reach it or at least get relatively close because they put so much emphasis at family. Sadly, nothing will ever change if people can't look inward at problems they have, but instead it easier to just blame the police.

Indeed. I wouldn't say I disagree with you on anything you've said. For example, I'm in favor of Affirmative Action because I see it as a way to make sure firms and institutions do not (consciously or not) exclude minorities from jobs they're perfectly capable of; for me it is "there are perfectly qualified people belonging to these groups, I want to make sure they're hired". Another example you gave, however, of different tax rates, seems like a bad idea to me because it bases itself entirely on the group the benefited belong to, as opposed to their characteristics.

There's that difference between "I want to make sure these people are not excluded due to their ethnicity" and "I want these people to receive help because I suspect they need it because of their ethnicity".

As for fixes, I'm not talking about anything night-to-day. I'd say you're right that attempts to solve one cultural issue become another cultural issue, but that doesn't mean it can't/shouldn't be done (especially if we do it right and not quickly). It will take time, yes, but to try and deny it is what gets on my nerves. If we see a relation between crime, poverty, low education, and ethnicity, we have two options: either suspect that this particular group is, for some reason, victim of socioeconomic factors that result in these outcomes, or our other option is to suspect that these outcomes happen because of their ethnicity.

The second option is bullshit. I'm sure we can all agree on this. So something should be done, and as for the what, I've explained what I think is good legislation and what isn't.

I'm not racist. I don't segregate.

You never hear this, because it was the leftists that advocated this and continue to support subsidies that discourage a family unit and corrupt education systems that function as disciplinary institutions. The other reason you never hear this is because it's drown out by the self-exculpatory leftists that establishes his platform of moral superiority by calling you a racist.

Leftists are, and always have been the oppressors:

In a society where Group A has no incentive to do better, be better, live better, work hard, or hold themselves accountable for the decisions they make because Group B tells them "It's not your fault", Group A has been socially oppressed by Group B. This is the ultimate end-game for leftists, whether it's intentional or not. They're buying into it and their refusal to even question their own beliefs make them just as guilty.

And the blame-games of BLM are pretty lame:

If you suck at a game and have a hard time winning but you feel that some of your losses are because you might have an internet connection that lags, do you fix the game so that you can't lose? Even if you were lagging, you're not going to get any better. You'll still play like shit and no one will respect you for winning. When people cause you to lag so that they can win just because they think you're a prick, is that evidence that lag was your problem in the first place or just that your tactics are bullshit? Would the more viable option not simply be to get better at the game before simply blaming your losses on lag?

The problem with Affirmative action is that it mostly benefits African Americans that aren't part of the systematic cycle of oppression. These are "middle class" black people that don't really need as much of a helping hand as someone in a Detroit slum. With provided incentives of maintaining a 2 parent household, all of American culture improve significantly.

Aside from that, the only other fixes involve inaction. Society will find a way to unify because it must. Groups like BLM that overtly state that oppression of any kind is exclusive to black people are basically just turning the clock back on themselves while other ethnic groups establish economic viability.

The other stance that leftists always refute is that we should not have immigrants in a country that can't feed and support it's own population. If BLM was truly concerned with the lives of black Americans, would this not be a stance on which they could agree? Most African-Americans did not come to America voluntarily. If we have people in America living in poverty, then why would more Americans = less problems?

I'm not saying "ban immigration", but we definitely need to handle that shit.

@Johnny-n-Roger: The USA can feed, protect, educate and insure its own population and more. Immigration shouldn't be an issue here.

Yes, the country can, but it's not the Government's responsibility. If you asked your friend to get you a number 1 from McDonalds and handed them $7 they would come back with a Big Mac and some change that you'd let them keep for making the run.

If you asked the Government to do it and handed them $6 they would come back and ask for an additional $125 to pay for the guy that had to drive the car, the other guy that had to order into the speaker, the third guy that confirmed the order and signed an official document verifying that the order was correct, a filing fee for the document, and a health tax because you're eating a high calorie meal.

The government sucks at whatever they do. They tax subsidies. They tax people's income that receive subsidies only to give it back to the State in the form of a "grant" so that human services can give it back to the person who paid the tax.

When things are privatized and there is legitimate competition the government can't compete. I use the USPS vs. FedEx example. Remember how desperate the USPS was to sell a damn stamp?

If we talk about being egalitarian and against racism (all fine there), using a specific skin color as flagship is a mistake and points in the opposite direction.
In fact, it's happening already. For some people in some circles it seems that for being a White cisgender male I have less rights to talk about minorities and integration. I'm a immigrant; I'm living in foreigner country; I know about integration... but that doesn't matter, because I'm white.

Now what sense does that make?

@Johnny-n-Roger: meh, that's a very basic misconception about the public sector and competition. If you believe that then the military shouldn't be financed with public money, rather it should be left to private companies to sort it out with perfect competition. The same with pensions, schools, roads etc etc. The truth is there are a lot of sectors where perfect competition simply doesn't exist, yet everybody should have access, such is the case with basic education and health insurance.

Either way I'm not sure what this has to do with the govt. intervening to reduce discrimination and systemic oppression. It's not like you'd be able to delegate that to a private firm.

It doesn't make sense. That's the whole irony of it. You can't end cultural disparity without crossing social boundaries. By confining the movement they almost ensure that no progress will be made.

If the Federal Government did, in fact, fund a healthcare system, it would cost more in one way or another than what private insurance companies charge. Yes, health insurance is bullshit, but so is a 15% income tax increase. If you do the math, most people end up paying more in taxes than they would for health insurance. I digress...

Discrimination is nearly impossible to prove unless overtly expressed, and systematic oppression requires social conformity to do it's dirty work. How long can you be aware of an oppressive system and still fall into it? As long as it takes for your own community to hold you accountable for it I suppose. That's the reality.

When you look at the correlation of crime and persons raised by a single parent, it transcends race as being the single most significant factor aside from Highschool Graduation rate. When 70% of black American households are single parent households, and black males graduation rates are disproportionately low it's disingenuous to say that it isn't a cultural issue. No one forces black families to be single parent households. No one forces black males to drop out of high school. There's no discrimination to blame.

With high crime comes decreased business, no incentives for developmental investments, a weakened tax base, and decaying infrastructure. Despite all of this, politicians have thrown millions of dollars at these communities and it's all been for no gain. It's just really hard for one to argue that "the system" is the problem when they know about its existence and still subscribe to the beliefs necessary for the system to exist.

maybe it was supposed to be the inverse of the square root

@Johnny-n-Roger:

Even though I'm an Afro/Native American, I'm not saying "NO".....I'm going to say "HELL NO"! And I know I speak for a large number of people in my community. The BLM movement has actually been counterproductive to it's own cause. It helps promote the victims mentality when there is more then enough blame to go around for the community and police. It also alienates other groups of people who might identify with the issue . As a community, we have to separate the real victims, criminals, good cops and bad cops. In some cases, you got some punk committing a crime, and it just so happens he gets hurt or killed in the proccess, it's unfortunate but the officer is just trying to do his job and protect the citizens. While in other cases you do have psychopathic cops who really are a threat to the community and society in general. The situation isn't just so black and white, there is definitely a gray area.

There is no denying that police brutality is a major concern, but it's a problem that's bigger then the Afro-American community. This is an issue that can/is/will effect all Americans, it's just that the media is sensationalizing the problem in the black community.

Creating a system that is economically disadvantageous to whites? Distinct concerns that whites would over time claim their economic conditions are unfavorable?

You are aware this nation was built and created with incalculable advantages for white people...seeing as they were the only citizens for the country. That advantage has grown up until about 50 years ago. So for the past 240 there have been favorable economic conditions for white people. So it would take what-300 years for the pendulum to even begin to swing to disadvantageous?

Most of your statements make sense...but don't hypothesize about disadvantageous whites IN THE U.S.A. That will never happen.

This is providing that it would be unreasonable to create race-based economic inequality to reconcile past race-based economic inequalities. This is because it isn't justified to create unfavorable economic conditions for anyone because of their race. When you start practicing justice through further injustice, you encounter the same problems. This is where you would risk whites making a claim that their economic conditions are unfavorable and need to be justified by redistribution. It's an "endless cycle of redistribution" paradigm.

The problem with your "pendulum" argument is that while you're able to frame a period of time,you'll have a hard time finding specific evidence in regard to exactly who these white beneficiaries were and from whom the labor was stolen. It gets especially tricky when you account for the Southern slave owning black Americans that would possibly position some descending black Americans to be considered of economic advantage over other black Americans thus creating cultural disparity.

For not being able to properly identify exactly which whites were, and to what degree, the beneficiaries of a race-based economic advantage and/or theft of labor it would be impossible to apportion any form of redistribution in a truly "justified" manor without taking every case to trial to court on an individual basis. Did these individuals steal labor from African slaves? Were their ancestors abolitionists, or civil rights activists that would qualify them for a deduction?

So yes, whites basically stole labor and oppressed minorities for years but to apply any sort of modern justice in regards to race-based wealth redistribution would simply be impractical. So I have to legitimately ask, if there is truly no justifiable solution to atone for past economic disadvantages and thefts of labor, at what point would a white man ever be exculpated from the white "privileged" class? Is there a reasonable frame of time or anything that can be done to transcend this alleged disparity?

@still_vicious said:

@Warlord_Irochi said:

If we talk about being egalitarian and against racism (all fine there), using a specific skin color as flagship is a mistake and points in the opposite direction.

In fact, it's happening already. For some people in some circles it seems that for being a White cisgender male I have less rights to talk about minorities and integration. I'm a immigrant; I'm living in foreigner country; I know about integration... but that doesn't matter, because I'm white.

Now what sense does that make?

My Crow Aggressions.

it was only about 1% of the population that actually owned slaves; the extremely wealthy, not sure why all white people get a rap for that. Guess racists are going to lie to further their cause. Guess where 4% of the population lives in slavery today? Africa.

Reality.

Yes, but you can't deny that there were race-based socioeconomic disadvantages. The problem is that If there's really no way to legitimately "redistribute" an indiscernible amount of labor theft, at what point will black Americans exculpate white Americans for these past offenses? Is there an end-game or objective in mind in which black Americans will no longer continue to constantly reinforce this narrative? If not, then what incentive do white Americans have to do anything at all?

It was a trivial sum given to McKesson's Mayoral campaign, and despite being a trivial sum, it serves to make a statement. While McKesson's platform actually seems well intentioned for the community, its just fiscally impossible while serving to drive manufacturing out of town and provides no incentive for anyone to invest in the city of Baltimore.

BLM basically frames itself as "The Anti Civil Rights" movement. When I heard they were requesting "segregated living quarters" at USC I was disgusted. It is ironic that we have a black President and that there's still some assumed underlying racial agenda preventing a black man from succeeding on an individual level that necessitates such a movement.

Racists are cowardly and will never reveal themselves, and businesses and universities aren't going to deny a black person an opportunity because the only color they see is green. They want that tax write off.

The problem with the Trump Protesters is that when they're asked what stances or quotations they find to be "racist" they either conjure something wildly unfounded or say "I just feel the hate". Donald Trump is a narcissistic buffoon, not a racist. His superiority complex extends to everyone, regardless of race or sex.

A lot of SJWs think that their "feelings" alone justify the character accusations they project onto others. They literally believe that someone can offend them simply by existing. The failure is that offense can be "taken" but never "given".

This is why they're called "regressive liberals". They've taken liberal ideologies, and as you asserted, have over-thought the principles to constitute an authoritarian application of liberalism. They don't realize the irony that by projecting their unwarranted character accusations on to others that they are actually being the prejudice of all, and that by considering themselves morally superior, they're essentially the self-proclaimed Supremacists that real liberals directly oppose.

g

Or Kool-Aid. There's without a doubt a "cultist" mentality here, with a sinister Jonestown effect. The only difference is that these cowards would never drink their own Kool-Aid, rather give it to the children of people they disagree with.

I think at some point it's just an "empowerment" movement just to see what they can get "banned". I don't think alot of these folks even really care, they just want to be a part of something. My real problem with these SJW's is that they're exercising a privilege by attending a University and abusing that privilege when there are plenty of intelligent youths out there that can't afford a college education.

When you're paying your own student loans, however, I can guarantee you're not subscribing to this bullshit. You don't have time. I'd be interested to know what socioeconomic class these self-described "oppressed" students belong to.

It's kind of like BLM in how its mostly just kids being kids and taking advantage of an opportunity to act up. It's just sad that BLM attempts to legitimize itself while reducing it's activity to such trivial bullshit. Also, if you're black and in college, focus on what you can learn, not on how its so impossible to learn because of the white people that disgust you. That's the type of bullshit that lead to Jim Crow. Seriously though, by going to college they're being provided with an opportunity that most people don't get, regardless of ethnicity. You can't be oppressed to the point of "genocide" and attending a University.

Affirmative action mostly benefits middle class black Americans while the black Americans that would normally fall into the cycle of oppression still do by not graduating highschool, being incarcerated to a mandatory minimum, or being a single mother that doesn't have reasonable access to a decent paying job or secondary education.

I would be interested to know what socioeconomic background these self-described "oppressed" people are coming from that would audaciously call someone living in a meth infested trailer park the "white privileged male".

And then they'll be bitching about how their "disadvantage" is the reason no one hires them when the reality is that they don't know how to function in society. You can't go into a work place and tell them you want a "safe-zone". They'll tell you to go home and feel as safe as you want because there are 10 more applicants on the way in.

Do you have any idea how racist that sounds? And this is coming from a black guy. Keep in mind that being labelled as a racist is one of the worst things you can call someone in this day and age (which is why I try to avoid accusing someone of such a thing unless I'm REALLY sure of it). So...there's this notion that I, as a black guy, should reasonably hate "all of you" because of some injustices that you probably had nothing to do with. While that's certainly being understanding of my hypothetical racism, it's sort of making me as a racist to be the default position, and it's actually surprising to find out that I don't feel that way. It could potentially come off as the sort of faux-progressivism that leads to comments like, "but he's so polite and articulate!" The notion that it's surprising for a black person to be polite and articulate is sort of insulting even if the comment was made with good intentions. Similarly, wondering why all the black people don't hate all the bad whities might have the good intention of pointing out that whites have done damage, but it still sort of comes off as insulting. Is it really so surprising that I, as a black person, don't hate all white people? That's coming damn close to implying that "blacks are racist against whites (even if they're justified)" is the default position. That I'm racist against whites until I demonstrate otherwise, and even in that case it's surprising that I don't (albeit justifiably) hate white people. That could come off as being INCREDIBLY insulting.

Black Lives Matter: Stop killing us! *disrupts a Bernie Sanders campaign rally*

All Lives Matter: All lives matter. Except refugees. Refugees can go f*** themselves.

Police Lives Matter: Police have it hard. If they want to perform a cavity search and shoot you for doing nothing, you let them!

Also on the subject of race, there are other considerations such as poverty and lack of social services to assist those in poverty. Also, our justice system isn't exactly fair to those who are black. Recall a black woman who fired a warning shot against her husband who had abused her vs a white woman who tried to slit an officer's throat. The black woman was to serve 20 years (she was released after 2 years) and the white woman was acquitted. Had the roles been reversed, the black woman would have had it worse no matter what.

This thread is idiotic and overestimates BLM. I may not agree with BLM's tactics but they are right on several points. Seriously though, if BLM started arming themselves, the GOP would be calling for gun control. That would be hilarious.

Are you saying that owning slaves are the only benefit that white people have had since the country's birth. What about citizenship? proper legal representation? adequate access to public education and university education? suffrage rights?

Whites had sooooo many generational advantages in addition to slavery. Wealthy or not. Fact.

Great point here. Personally(though I can't speak for all minorities and ethnic groups) I would be satisfied with representative coverage and reporting in our government's social news and media. If you dropped someone an alien into the U.S. and told them to view the news to get a pulse of America; that alien would think that most criminals and drug dealers are minorities, and most leaders of the country are white.

Those are not true statements...but that is what the media and prevailing wisdom perpetrates.

I agree with the OP, blacks have no issues and should just keep their mouths shut!

{Sarcasm}

Here in America the black community wants to blame everyone else for their problems and short comings. Of course that statement is not including every black person. Anyone who isn't towing that line by calling it as they see it is called either a racist or an Uncle Tom. Look at the first list given by the O.P. from the b.s. "BLM" movement.

If BLM was a legit movement that actually acted on what it believed in, it would be looking at the overwhelming inner city violence. Otherwise it's just a bunch of chicken hawks like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson that go to where the media is reporting stories so they get money and attention.

Why are you comparing individual opinion and corporate positions on social issue? Corporations are not people and will always take the least offensive stance (i.e. most PC).

The point I was making there is that the blame of slavery is disproportionately blamed on all white people. The slaves were caught and sold by blacks and Arabs, and sold to whites and Arabs. yet Arabs get no heat about that today, blacks get no heat for their role in it, and despite only 1% of whites owning slaves, I constantly hear hate towards whites today because of it. Today no whites own slaves in western countries, but plenty of blacks do in Africa, but nobody says anything about it. It's even seems like it's frowned upon to point out these facts. Yes facts. The only explanation I can plainly see is a refusal to actually have anything more than a shallow understanding due to racism against whites.

The irony is that it's the media is liberal. They legitimize race-based criminal distinctions so that they can debate the issue 3 on one with a conservative and say "hey look, conservatives are racist because they think it's a cultural issue and don't feel sorry for black people".

It is a cultural issue. Not a black cultural issue, but an "urban" cultural issue.

The sarcasm obviously being that what you suggested was not my stance. Your stance, however, of "they should just keep their mouths shut" is one of bigotry.

@n64dd: It is a movement based on holding police accountable for their actions against black people. Why would they need to include inner city violence to be legit?

Your fist statement is non-fact. As a racial advancement movement it would be most effective to address the core issues oppressing the black community, with inner-city violence being a primary component.

@Johnny-n-Roger: Then prove it's a non fact.

2.5% of gun deaths for blacks are from police officers, 90% are by other blacks.

check.

@still_vicious: which has nothing to do with what I said.

I hate to but in here but it is a movement based on holding police accountable for their actions against black people. That is a fact. You can add other crap from what random blm people have said here or there to the movement if you feel the need but that doesn't change the fact It is a movement based on holding police accountable for their actions against black people. It seemed to them that black lives where not considered important to police and they were shooting first and figuring out the rest later. I don't care whether you believe that was actually the case or not but it is the reason the group was founded. Do we really have to argue even that?

Do you think they don't address that? You have never heard of the stop the violence movement? Never seen a Spike Lee movie? The black community is consumed with attempts to stop the inner-city violence. They have been for years. You think they ignore it and just look at the police and blame society. In reality they look at both. Visit a city sometime and talk to people and pay attention.

You must be new here. Allow me to show you around.

Of course rich ass execs support BLM. Publicity, duh.

When I said I "wonder" I meant, very very casually. Like, hypothetically...something you'd laugh off. Of course I don't expect black people to hate everyone because they're black and they have a "right" to hate because they or someone they know went through race-based hardship.

And don't take people on here so seriously, especially me. Half (at least half!) the time I am playing Devil's Advocate or arguing a point I don't even believe in. Just remember: I really don't give two shits :D