Trump Regime thread.

[seanbrock 1,684]

I used to drink with this cop just about every night at the bar my buddy worked at. He told me that cops are trained to profile black people Then there's also the fact that they use blacked out Chargers with lights behind the grill to give people fucking speeding tickets and there's a huge problem with police in this country. Look at the percentage of black men in jail and the performance of their schools where there are a high percentage of blacks and there's a HUGE fucking racial inequality problem in this country. If you disagree, that's fine but you're ignoring facts and history and just so obviously wrong.

 

The whole Black Lives Matter movement is interesting. On social issues this country has been pushed real left which would be good except I think that you're going to run into big problems when you tell an average white guy who makes around 30k a year and is struggling to survive and/or provide for his family that he's a privileged racist asshole. I will say this, when you start negotiating from the middle you lose 100% of the time, especially when you're going up against legal precedent and a fuck-ton of money. Radicalism is sometimes needed for progress. I'd really like to see BLM become more organized and have a little more of a coherent and consistent message. I hope it comes with time.

Edited August 25, 2017 by seanbrock

[Sarge+ 3,436]

lol @ that woman. Get out of here.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Most of what she said is ridiculous but I think empty homes that have been foreclosed on or abandoned should be taken from banks (with no compensation; they were already bailed out by tax payers) and given to homeless people, especially homeless vets. There's really no reason anyone should be homeless in this country. Maybe we could start giving them to minorities first and then start giving them to families who are renting homes.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

This is literally a none issue being treated as an issue by talking heads who are triggered.

Calling what she said on there "racist" and "bigoted" really shows the disconnect between some white people in this country and those who actually suffer from real racism. Beside her call to action against white nationalists (not even all white people), where does she even attack white people?

I don't agree with all the points she made, or at least not to the extremes, but it's one person's radical opinion on how to fix problems that are deeply rooted in America's DNA.

 

BLM just gets worse every day. That's in my city, too. That lady is batshit insane, I believe I have had the displeasure of hearing her screeching in person on more than one occasion.

 

I can't believe that that particular article isn't satire, but if anyone is going to write something like that and it not be satire it would be Ms. Helm.

 

This is what I'm talking about when Dmac talks about how these people aren't really part of BLM. It's the No True Scotsman fallacy. She is a co-founder of BLM in Louisville. This IS part of their agenda.

 

 

This is the perfect example of what I've been talking about.

I went to the Charlottesville BLM twitter page and went all the way back to August 16th and found nothing about this post. They didn't share it, their Facebook page didn't share it, or retweet people talking about it, etc.

Instead, they are sharing posts about ways people can help local organizers.

 

The only person who said this was one of it's leaders. She didn't say she was speaking on behalf of the BLM, she didn't say she was speaking on the behalf of the BLM leaders, she didn't say she was saying this in conjecture with the organization, hell, she even threw out some hashtags at the end of her posts and none included "black lives matter".

It's ok for people within an organization to have their own opinions.

​Yes, in an organization called "Black Lives Matter" that's aiming to bring radical change their will be people with radical views. But lets not act like the organization moves in ways that anti white.

Edited August 25, 2017 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Most of what she said is ridiculous but I think empty homes that have been foreclosed on or abandoned should be taken from banks (with no compensation; they were already bailed out by tax payers) and given to homeless people, especially homeless vets. There's really no reason anyone should be homeless in this country. Maybe we could start giving them to minorities first and then start giving them to families who are renting homes.

 

See now, I think most could get behind that in principle. The problem is when you start taking peoples property, how do you know when to stop.

 

As an example I own 2 homes, one in Washington, the other in Kansas. I would give my house up for the remainder of my life in an initiative to end homelessness if everyone pitched in what they could. That said when i die, it should pass to my son, not be gifted to someone else.

 

The problem would then be, I have 3 cars. Do I uave to give up 2 ? I guess really it is just where do you draw the line on when you can take property from one and give to another. I personally would like to see mandates on what you can charge people for rent based on income. Say you have a guy who has 3 kids and makes 45,000. You should not be able to charge him more than 25 percent of net salary. I think that would be a better solution.

[seanbrock 1,684]

There are enough abandoned and foreclosed homes in this country for that to not even be needed man. I think your idea about rent caps is something that should be pursued. That's a real good idea but not every landlord is rich. They're basically running a small business.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

That's not an awful idea, what do you do about property taxes though? I imagine it'd be pretty hard for a formerly homeless person to afford the home, even if the home itself was free. I mean, property taxes are bullshit anyway...

[seanbrock 1,684]

Idk, probably waive them since they weren't being collected anyway. Obviously part of that program would have to involve some sort of job training or education. If the person is seriously mentally ill maybe just permanently waive them. If they can manage to get some shitty job on their own, just treat it like section 8 housing?

Edited August 25, 2017 by seanbrock

[blotsfan 2,112]

Id rather have the government purchase forclosed houses from the banks using eminent domain (shocker, eminent domain being used to help poor people rather than fuck them over) and give subsidized/free rents to people based on their financial situation. I'd give first priority to the people currently living in the house, since that would be the cheapest option, plus they'd be homeless anyways so why not. Simply taking forclosed houses would obliterate the market for mortgages, making home ownership essentially impossible for the middle class. This is similar to the current system, but the massive amounts of new homes in the system would make it far more accessible.

[seanbrock 1,684]

I've read the houses to homeless ratio is 6:1 I haven't been able to fact check that. That would mean there would still be plenty of houses available for people to buy and if we're going to say fuck the banks we might as well go all the way and bar them from jacking up prices with harsh penalties.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Trump is a fucking monster.

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/348061-trump-pardons-arpaio

[Thanatos 2,847]

I have no problem with giving houses to homeless people, simply a problem with prioritizing black homeless people, as she suggests.

 

@blots: No where did I say they couldn't do what she was saying, I'm not saying they are first amendment protected. I am saying going to someone else's work and trying to get them fired because you think they're a problem has two major issues.

 

A) You set a damn dangerous precedent and

B) You're not always right. A professor from Arkansas has received multiple death threats from people because they think he was at the Charlottesville rally, when he was in fact in WV vacationing with his wife. These people don't care and have continued to harass him until he provides proof of this because he bears a resemblance to someone at the rally.

 

@Dmac: That lady is from Louisville, not Charlottesville, you went to the wrong twitter. Regardless, while it is ok for people within a movement to have their own opinions, when a leader of a movement posts said opinion as an article and does not include a disclaimer that this opinion is solely theirs then most people would think that BLM supports her views. If they do not, they should come out and say so. This was one of their leaders making these ridiculous statements- and I'm sorry, they are utterly, completely ridiculous without a single grain of sense in any one of them- and until BLM says otherwise, it is perfectly fine to assume they support it.

Trump is a fucking monster.

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/348061-trump-pardons-arpaio

 

That hardly makes him a monster. Just more favoritism for people that shouldn't get it. He's done a ton of shit worse than that.

Edited August 26, 2017 by Thanatos

[blotsfan 2,112]

Arpaio is a truly reprehensible person. This pardon has 0 pretense of being anything other than getting a crony out of jail. Sends a message to anyone that might be a witness against him in the russia investigation.

[OSUViking 505]

Because the US doesn't have a history of discrimination against white people and doesn't currently have a president who supports black supremacy. Being killed by a dog has the same result as being run over by a car, but one is much more of an issue because it actually happens frequently.

 

This is what I'm talking about. You've just totally ignored that millions of European immigrants and millions of Catholics have faced discrimination and persecution throughout US history. The KKK used to target Catholic communities as well. Hell, I went to a Catholic grade school and sometimes people from the nearby trashy neighborhood would yell shit at us for being heathens in a heathen school. It happens, still.

 

People are more complex than skin color. I'm not even trying to compare this discrimination to that faced by the black community, but to say white people haven't had systematic and targeted persecution is simply whitewashing it (ha!).

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

This is a common form of hijacking a conversation and preventing real progress from being had, and there's a name for it but I'm not smart enough to know what it is. The cool kids have started calling it "all lives mattering" a subject.

 

Turning a specific issue into a broader issue almost to imply that 1. They are on the same scale or are equal problems, and 2. Assuming the person making the statements is so naive as to not know that the problem exists outside of one group.

 

Doing this, effectively refocuses, distracts and diminishes the issue being discussed.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

 

 

 

This is the perfect example of what I've been talking about.

I went to the Charlottesville BLM twitter page and went all the way back to August 16th and found nothing about this post. They didn't share it, their Facebook page didn't share it, or retweet people talking about it, etc.

Instead, they are sharing posts about ways people can help local organizers.

 

The only person who said this was one of it's leaders. She didn't say she was speaking on behalf of the BLM, she didn't say she was speaking on the behalf of the BLM leaders, she didn't say she was saying this in conjecture with the organization, hell, she even threw out some hashtags at the end of her posts and none included "black lives matter".

 

This is where a lot of people get fed up with the bullshit that is BLM. Why is it crazy to assume that 1 of 3 founding members says something negative and it is a stretch to believe that the overall sentiment of the statement is not ingrained in BLM ideology ? That is how the world works. Trumps says something dumb, and the rest of the world lambasts the US, like our pulling out of the climate agreement. Some news outlets took the time to differentiate between Trump and the US, but most did not.

 

To make this pertinent. When a cop shoots an unarmed black person, people say cops are bad. Look at this thread, barely any distinction has been made to separate those shitty cops from the overwhelming majority of the good ones. Take the media, or your own BLM group who also make hardly any distinction between the actions of one cop, and the rest of the fraternity. How come the actions of one cop in St. Louis sparks a protest in say Detroit, where the cops had done nothing wrong? Just because they are a member of the fraternity known as LEO's.

 

You can not pick and choose when it is convenient to have the sentiments or actions of one define the narrative for an entire group of people, and ignore it when it is damning to your argument and still expect it to be taken seriously.

 

I think BLM is a fraud and a shithole of a group, but that is my opinion I dont speak for all white people. For instance when people say white people (yourself) included you lump people like me who hates BLM and their founders in with people like Blots who if given the chance to change his skin tone or be born black would in a heartbeat (hyperbole....sort of). The point is you do not differentiate between guy like me and guys like Blots, but you want "white people" to separate the founder of a movement from the movement. People dont give Hitler that distinction when talking about Nazi's because Nazi's are the standard bearers of his ideals which is why they are Nazi's.

 

 

 

It's ok for people within an organization to have their own opinions.

​Yes, in an organization called "Black Lives Matter" that's aiming to bring radical change their will be people with radical views. But lets not act like the organization moves in ways that anti white.

 

 

 

Radicalism is evil in all forms. I understand starting from the null position almost never works, or rarely so anyway. That being said the ground is fertile for someone to try because I can tell you BLM has just fragmented more people than it has united. When #MikeBrown was a thing in Ferguson black people alienated a whole bunch of cops that were there to help them, and now things will never be the same. Lets call it what it is, Mike Brown deserved to be shot if anyone ever did that BLM is complaining about. BLM and I can agree Trayvon Martin, Philando Castille (Most egregious to me), Walter Scott, and Eric Garner were all outrageous and all of those cops need to be in prison. No doubt about it. It cheapens their lives when you lump them in with trash like Alton Sterling and Mike Brown.

 

And I would say that what BLM says it is on its guiding principles and what it does in action on the streets is very different. You want to talk about making distinctions talk about the BLM people who march with BLM who say things like "kill white people" and "all white people must suffer" and "Take what is ours" which is my favorite because that person most likely has earned nothing but wants it given to him for free. You want people to make those distinctions, but yet wont extend white people and cops the same courtesy....not going to happen. BLM will never be successful and that is why. It is hypocritical organization that wants to have its cake and eat it too.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Omerta

[Omerta+ 1,206]

This is a common form of hijacking a conversation and preventing real progress from being had, and there's a name for it but I'm not smart enough to know what it is. The cool kids have started calling it "all lives mattering" a subject.

 

Turning a specific issue into a broader issue almost to imply that 1. They are on the same scale or are equal problems, and 2. Assuming the person making the statements is so naive as to not know that the problem exists outside of one group.

 

Doing this, effectively refocuses, distracts and diminishes the issue being discussed.

 

 

So is that what you want, is a discussion ? Is that what most black people want, a real, honest, open, and meaningful discussion? If that is it shows a maturity that is not often found in politics and in my opinion the BLM movement. They dont appear to want a discussion, they want a place where like minded people can go to channel anger and express outrage at a system they believe is holding them back. They are looking for anything but a discussion. They remind me of teenagers who feel they have been wronged and just want to let all of their frustrations out at an entity. Which is fine, just dont confuse that with making any real lasting change or being open to dialogue.

[Thanatos 2,847]

This is where a lot of people get fed up with the bullshit that is BLM. Why is it crazy to assume that 1 of 3 founding members says something negative and it is a stretch to believe that the overall sentiment of the statement is not ingrained in BLM ideology ? That is how the world works. Trumps says something dumb, and the rest of the world lambasts the US, like our pulling out of the climate agreement. Some news outlets took the time to differentiate between Trump and the US, but most did not.

 

You can not pick and choose when it is convenient to have the sentiments or actions of one define the narrative for an entire group of people, and ignore it when it is damning to your argument and still expect it to be taken seriously.

 

All of this goes double when BLM themselves has not come out and disavowed the lady's statements.

 

What the fuck are we supposed to do here, Dmac? One of the leaders of BLM puts out some ridiculously radical statements, BLM themselves do not come out against them. Ergo, BLM is supporting said statements. Why is this such a ridiculous conclusion to make? Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Thanatos

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

This is a common form of hijacking a conversation and preventing real progress from being had, and there's a name for it but I'm not smart enough to know what it is. The cool kids have started calling it "all lives mattering" a subject.

 

Turning a specific issue into a broader issue almost to imply that 1. They are on the same scale or are equal problems, and 2. Assuming the person making the statements is so naive as to not know that the problem exists outside of one group.

 

Doing this, effectively refocuses, distracts and diminishes the issue being discussed.

 

What is the issue, exactly?

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

This is where a lot of people get fed up with the bullshit that is BLM. Why is it crazy to assume that 1 of 3 founding members says something negative and it is a stretch to believe that the overall sentiment of the statement is not ingrained in BLM ideology ? That is how the world works. Trumps says something dumb, and the rest of the world lambasts the US, like our pulling out of the climate agreement. Some news outlets took the time to differentiate between Trump and the US, but most did not.

 

Because it's not true. She's not 1 of the 3 founders of the organization, she's simply one of the leaders of the BLM in Louisville.

 

It's a large, sometimes unorganized organization that is chapter-based. Most chapter based organizations that have been around forever have dysfunctions on local levels.

To make this pertinent. When a cop shoots an unarmed black person, people say cops are bad. Look at this thread, barely any distinction has been made to separate those shitty cops from the overwhelming majority of the good ones. Take the media, or your own BLM group who also make hardly any distinction between the actions of one cop, and the rest of the fraternity. How come the actions of one cop in St. Louis sparks a protest in say Detroit, where the cops had done nothing wrong? Just because they are a member of the fraternity known as LEO's.

 

Because BLM is not just about cops killing unarmed black people and getting away with it, it's deeper then just cop killings. This is the first thing said on their about us page.

You can not pick and choose when it is convenient to have the sentiments or actions of one define the narrative for an entire group of people, and ignore it when it is damning to your argument and still expect it to be taken seriously.

 

This is not a case of me picking and choosing.

 

There's a big difference between supporting a president who has on several occasions shown that bigotry is a part of who he is, and supporting an organization that supports real, positive change.

 

If, and when they start acting like a hate group like some people fantasize them being, I would be the first to denounce them.

I think BLM is a fraud and a shithole of a group, but that is my opinion I dont speak for all white people. For instance when people say white people (yourself) included you lump people like me who hates BLM and their founders in with people like Blots who if given the chance to change his skin tone or be born black would in a heartbeat (hyperbole....sort of). The point is you do not differentiate between guy like me and guys like Blots, but you want "white people" to separate the founder of a movement from the movement. People dont give Hitler that distinction when talking about Nazi's because Nazi's are the standard bearers of his ideals which is why they are Nazi's.

When I have ever done this? I don't do this, and have never done this.

 

In the very same post you quoted I said, "some" white people. Although, if the shoe fits...

 

But if you want to make this about white nationalists, this one I'll be blunt and cast a wide net like I did before. I assume the worst of all of them. As I do of any organization that thinks that who they are is the reason they should be above others.

 

Additionally, it's pretty telling to me that when a white person like Blots tries to be an ally to a minority you come away with the impression that he wishes he was black himself.

Radicalism is evil in all forms. I understand starting from the null position almost never works, or rarely so anyway. That being said the ground is fertile for someone to try because I can tell you BLM has just fragmented more people than it has united. When #MikeBrown was a thing in Ferguson black people alienated a whole bunch of cops that were there to help them, and now things will never be the same. Lets call it what it is, Mike Brown deserved to be shot if anyone ever did that BLM is complaining about. BLM and I can agree Trayvon Martin, Philando Castille (Most egregious to me), Walter Scott, and Eric Garner were all outrageous and all of those cops need to be in prison. No doubt about it. It cheapens their lives when you lump them in with trash like Alton Sterling and Mike Brown.

 

BLM alienates cops because if cops want to help people who are suffering from systematic oppression, they should call out and expect better from their peers and change the way they do policing.

 

Not holding barbecues for the people who are demanding change.

And I would say that what BLM says it is on its guiding principles and what it does in action on the streets is very different. You want to talk about making distinctions talk about the BLM people who march with BLM who say things like "kill white people" and "all white people must suffer" and "Take what is ours" which is my favorite because that person most likely has earned nothing but wants it given to him for free. You want people to make those distinctions, but yet wont extend white people and cops the same courtesy....not going to happen. BLM will never be successful and that is why. It is hypocritical organization that wants to have its cake and eat it too.

 

Just because a black person, or a group of black people come together and yell "black lives matter!", it doesn't mean they are representing the organization, it simply means that they agree with the general premise of the saying, which is that in America, Black lives don't matter as much as whites. It's unfair to the group and all the work they do to blame them for it.

 

​Likewise, if an actual protest by BLM is happening and some black guy, or group of black people join the protest and act out, there's no logic behind faulting the organization for it, like they are the ones who asked these people to turn things violent. These people are acting alone and don't represent the principles of the organization.

 

All of this goes double when BLM themselves has not come out and disavowed the lady's statements.

 

What the fuck are we supposed to do here, Dmac? One of the leaders of BLM puts out some ridiculously radical statements, BLM themselves do not come out against them. Ergo, BLM is supporting said statements. Why is this such a ridiculous conclusion to make? Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

Because nothing she said was so egregious that BLM should have to come out and denounce it. Again, I honestly don't understand why some of you are or seem upset by what she posted.

 

This is literally a none issue being made into one.

 

She didn't kill anyone, or call anyone to violence, she didn't make demands, she didn't do her post through some official channel, she didn't say anything anti white (besides, throwing the word privileged around?) she simply stated her opinion.

 

Its pretty clear that some of you guys have your minds made up about this and are on a witch hunt to find whatever ammo you can find to denounce an organization that's making real change. I am not in the business of trying to convince people who think an organization that does nothing but uplift their community without negatively attacking others is not a hate group.

 

My goal was simply to make sure that everyone knows and understand that there is a difference between the hashtag thrown around by everyone and the actual organization. What you guys do with that is up to you.

So is that what you want, is a discussion ? Is that what most black people want, a real, honest, open, and meaningful discussion? If that is it shows a maturity that is not often found in politics and in my opinion the BLM movement. They dont appear to want a discussion, they want a place where like minded people can go to channel anger and express outrage at a system they believe is holding them back. They are looking for anything but a discussion. They remind me of teenagers who feel they have been wronged and just want to let all of their frustrations out at an entity. Which is fine, just dont confuse that with making any real lasting change or being open to dialogue.

 

Well if you want me to be totally honest, no, I don't want a discussion. I, and many others are past that point of discussions and want real change.

 

But the only way real change happens through addressing an issue head on and being able to openly talk about something.

 

This becomes impossible when a specific problem gets bought up, and instead of addressing that problem, we dilute it by saying something like, "blacks aren't the only ones who get discriminated".

 

What is the issue, exactly?

 

America historically oppressing black people? Having a president who it takes collectively democrats, and republicans to get him to denounce white supremacy, only for him to change his mind again?

[seanbrock 1,684]

You guys have to keep in mind that BLM doesn't have alot of money behind it and is a pretty new organization. Hell, BLM is way more than an organization now.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

 

Because it's not true. She's not 1 of the 3 founders of the organization, she's simply one of the leaders of the BLM in Louisville.

 

It's a large, sometimes unorganized organization that is chapter-based. Most chapter based organizations that have been around forever have dysfunctions on local levels.

 

Because BLM is not just about cops killing unarmed black people and getting away with it, it's deeper then just cop killings. This is the first thing said on their about us page.

 

This is not a case of me picking and choosing.

 

There's a big difference between supporting a president who has on several occasions shown that bigotry is a part of who he is, and supporting an organization that supports real, positive change.

 

If, and when they start acting like a hate group like some people fantasize them being, I would be the first to denounce them.

When I have ever done this? I don't do this, and have never done this.

 

In the very same post you quoted I said, "some" white people. Although, if the shoe fits...

 

But if you want to make this about white nationalists, this one I'll be blunt and cast a wide net like I did before. I assume the worst of all of them. As I do of any organization that thinks that who they are is the reason they should be above others.

 

Additionally, it's pretty telling to me that when a white person like Blots tries to be an ally to a minority you come away with the impression that he wishes he was black himself.

 

BLM alienates cops because if cops want to help people who are suffering from systematic oppression, they should call out and expect better from their peers and change the way they do policing.

 

Not holding barbecues for the people who are demanding change.

 

 

Because nothing she said was so egregious that BLM should have to come out and denounce it. Again, I honestly don't understand why some of you are or seem upset by what she posted.

 

This is literally a none issue being made into one.

 

She didn't kill anyone, or call anyone to violence, she didn't make demands, she didn't do her post through some official channel, she didn't say anything anti white (besides, throwing the word privileged around?) she simply stated her opinion.

 

Its pretty clear that some of you guys have your minds made up about this and are on a witch hunt to find whatever ammo you can find to denounce an organization that's making real change. I am not in the business of trying to convince people who think an organization that does nothing but uplift their community without negatively attacking others is not a hate group.

 

My goal was simply to make sure that everyone knows and understand that there is a difference between the hashtag thrown around by everyone and the actual organization. What you guys do with that is up to you.

 

Well if you want me to be totally honest, no, I don't want a discussion. I, and many others are past that point of discussions and want real change.

 

But the only way real change happens through addressing an issue head on and being able to openly talk about something.

 

This becomes impossible when a specific problem gets bought up, and instead of addressing that problem, we dilute it by saying something like, "blacks aren't the only ones who get discriminated".

 

I personally think you are missing the forest for the trees. I was wrong about her being a founder. I meant local organizer, but it came out wrong, I will own that. The point still stands though. Her sentiments will be linked to her cause like anyone who serves a purpose that is higher than just themselves. Soldiers go through it, airlines go through it, stores go through it, it is the price of doing business if you are going to run an organization. People in the military will say something dumb and now the Army is all bad. Trump says ban trannys and the military is somehow the bad guy when they did not even make it happen. Cops denounce bad cops all the time but what BLM chooses to pick up is the negative stuff. If you dont want your sentiments associated with a group dont be a visible leader in that group.

 

I was talking about cops. You painted cops with a wide brush, not white people. I should have clarified. There is no distinction made really. Not once ( I have not checked though to be fair) have I heard you or anyone say, "bad cops in this country are a problem" I see,"Cops" with no distinction to be made. The reason I brought blots up is because he does not try to be an ally, he actively blames white people for the ills of the world. Remember when Rachel Dolezal was kicking ass for the NAACP, what happened there? So much for acceptance and wanting ally's lol.

 

Lets be real here, black people are every bit as responsible for the state of things as white people. We are 60 or 70 years past overt racism in this country and you have dumb ass black people running around talking about reparations igniting a furor by dumb ass white people who think all black people are the mindless retards on the TV, and dont want to address things in their own house. The thing is placing blame at the government or white people's feet is completely ignoring the recent history of our country. Black people can and are every bit as capable of racism as white people, and this is something that gets glossed over because in this country we have to compare suffering to see who is the bigger martyr. I am irish they were hanging us getting off the boat in New York harbor. That shit happened a while ago, who gives a fuck?

 

I read their page and their guiding principle is a can of fuck that blew up on a wall with no organization. They support everyone but white people apparently (not that they should, nor do I care). The support queer women, black women, dont want black women to have to work two jobs, and just a bunch of other talking point, and they have no real solutions. Not once did I hear a solution to what they want, no proposals, no nothing. It was a way of saying everything and nothing at all.

 

Neither have you though. What do you want to see done ? Saying something cool like,"I want to see the undoing of the white patriarchal society that has made a fortune off the back of underprivileged and disenfranchised parts of our society, while not sharing in the bounty that the seeds of our labor have planted has borne" That sounds deep and profound and actually nothing was said. The BLM site is the same way, as well as their protests. Their is nothing of consequence ever said. Where are the black intellectuals out there, what are they doing. I have not seen them writing charters, drafting legislation, lobbying congressman, electing local officials that align with their values, mobilizing the youth of the black community for education. Better yet where are the heros of the black community like Ice Cube, Jay Z, Diddy, 50 and all these people ? They are on twitter while young black men are dying, but they dont care they cant see them from Mailbu. They are not setting up college grants, they are not setting up non profits for underprivileged black children. More athletes care about people in Africa then the ones in their back yard.

 

What I am saying is that all I hear from the black community is a bunch of hot air with a disorganized message that is so fragmented, that making out what they really want is hard. Smart black men such as yourselves need to spread the word, but since you are past discussion what are the youngsters to do? What do you want ? What is your message, specifically ? I mean you want people to understand but no one is telling us the particulars of what you want. How are black people being oppressed right now? These are all questions nobody has any data on or has presented anyway. Just a bunch of bullshit feelings. Nobdys feelings matter, at the end of your feelings is nothing.

 

Her message is stale. It is just gimme, gimme, gimme. That is why people are upset about it. She is a lazy do nothing bitch who wants things given to her. That tends to piss people off. If I was asking the black community to give me things, they would look at me like I was crazy.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Omerta

[Omerta+ 1,206]

You guys have to keep in mind that BLM doesn't have alot of money behind it and is a pretty new organization. Hell, BLM is way more than an organization now.

 

They will never have money, their time n the sun has ended. They are a dying organization that will be all but defunct in 5 years and it will get the Kony 2012 treatment. People will forget about it and it will have never amounted to more than a blip on the radar.

 

People who want to fight for black people in their community are going to need a better platform than the shit show that is BLM. Nobody takes them seriously, nor will they. What they really need to do is put all their might behind the NAACP because that is an organization who can do something.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

 

Because it's not true. She's not 1 of the 3 founders of the organization, she's simply one of the leaders of the BLM in Louisville.

 

It's a large, sometimes unorganized organization that is chapter-based. Most chapter based organizations that have been around forever have dysfunctions on local levels.

 

Because BLM is not just about cops killing unarmed black people and getting away with it, it's deeper then just cop killings. This is the first thing said on their about us page.

 

This is not a case of me picking and choosing.

 

There's a big difference between supporting a president who has on several occasions shown that bigotry is a part of who he is, and supporting an organization that supports real, positive change.

 

If, and when they start acting like a hate group like some people fantasize them being, I would be the first to denounce them.

When I have ever done this? I don't do this, and have never done this.

 

In the very same post you quoted I said, "some" white people. Although, if the shoe fits...

 

But if you want to make this about white nationalists, this one I'll be blunt and cast a wide net like I did before. I assume the worst of all of them. As I do of any organization that thinks that who they are is the reason they should be above others.

 

Additionally, it's pretty telling to me that when a white person like Blots tries to be an ally to a minority you come away with the impression that he wishes he was black himself.

 

BLM alienates cops because if cops want to help people who are suffering from systematic oppression, they should call out and expect better from their peers and change the way they do policing.

 

Not holding barbecues for the people who are demanding change.

 

 

Because nothing she said was so egregious that BLM should have to come out and denounce it. Again, I honestly don't understand why some of you are or seem upset by what she posted.

 

This is literally a none issue being made into one.

 

She didn't kill anyone, or call anyone to violence, she didn't make demands, she didn't do her post through some official channel, she didn't say anything anti white (besides, throwing the word privileged around?) she simply stated her opinion.

 

Its pretty clear that some of you guys have your minds made up about this and are on a witch hunt to find whatever ammo you can find to denounce an organization that's making real change. I am not in the business of trying to convince people who think an organization that does nothing but uplift their community without negatively attacking others is not a hate group.

 

My goal was simply to make sure that everyone knows and understand that there is a difference between the hashtag thrown around by everyone and the actual organization. What you guys do with that is up to you.

 

Well if you want me to be totally honest, no, I don't want a discussion. I, and many others are past that point of discussions and want real change.

 

But the only way real change happens through addressing an issue head on and being able to openly talk about something.

 

This becomes impossible when a specific problem gets bought up, and instead of addressing that problem, we dilute it by saying something like, "blacks aren't the only ones who get discriminated".

 

 

America historically oppressing black people? Having a president who it takes collectively democrats, and republicans to get him to denounce white supremacy, only for him to change his mind again?

 

 

Systemic racism doesn't exist, or in very few and rare amounts. What you are doing is living as a victim and telling other people to live as victims.

 

That won't help them. Do something different.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Systemic racism doesn't exist, or in very few and rare amounts. What you are doing is living as a victim and telling other people to live as victims.

That won't help them. Do something different.

You, you're good.