Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Gunfight at the O.K. CorralFollow

#102 Jul 18 2016 at 4:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
On you on-board with mine that being a racist hater and refusing to publicly acknowledge that fact is also pretty cowardly?


Sure. Where I have an issue is when a third party assumes a person or group is racist (perhaps merely because they fail to actively support a group like BLM), demands that they admit to their racism, and when they don't condemns them for it. IMO, it's a pretty unreasonable standard to try to apply.

Quote:
Put another way: Do you honestly think that of all the people who don't agree that "black lives matter" none of then are racist haters?


First off, let's clarify that I'm making a huge distinction between agreeing with the position and actions of the organization known as Black Lives Matter and agreeing with the statement that "black lives matter". Obviously, anyone who says that black lives don't matter is likely a racist of some form. But what we've seen is people who attempt to make the statement in the context of "all lives matter, and black lives are part of all lives, thus black lives matter" are labeled as racist because they're not just leaving it at the base statement. The implication is that they're attempting to deny the fact that black lives matter, when what they're actually doing is avoiding what appears to be an exclusionary statement that is itself racist in nature. If black lives matter in some way other than all other lives matter, then we're innately placing a different value on someone's life based on their skin color, which I would assume you would agree is racist by nature.

So ironically, an attempt to avoid a blatantly racist statement is in turn condemned for being an implied racist statement. Which perhaps says a whole lot about how ridiculous the entire issue of race has become.

Now, if we're assuming you were speaking of the organization Black Lives Matter, then of course not. In the same way that it would be unreasonable to assume that of all the people who like to visit Disneyland none of them are racist haters. Doesn't mean that I'm going to condemn Disney for catering to racist haters though. You can't reasonably apply the logic that way, or you'll conclude that any group, statement, position, etc is "racist" because some people who are members of said group, or make said statement, or hold said position happen to be racist as well. Which things you decide are racist become purely about which ones you apply this unfair standard to.

A far better approach is to avoid creating dual meaning terms and labels in the first place. Which is one of the reasons I have an issue with BLM. They appear to have done this intentionally, not to assist with the problem at hand (black lives being lost at greater rates than other groups), but to create conflict. Which, if your objective is to actually address the problem, is counter productive. Now, if your objective is to create more racially aligned discord within our society, then it's exactly the sort of thing you'd do. And if the results are any indication, they seem to be achieving it quite well.

Hence my problem.

Edited, Jul 18th 2016 3:34pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#103 Jul 19 2016 at 6:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
If black lives matter in some way other than all other lives matter, then we're innately placing a different value on someone's life based on their skin color, which I would assume you would agree is racist by nature.
Saying Black lives matter is different than Saying all lives matter because it's addressing the specific issue that it seems that black lives are treated as if they didn't matter. It's directly addressing a problem, and is not racist. Saying all lives matter just shows you've completely missed the point.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#105 Jul 19 2016 at 6:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
If black lives matter in some way other than all other lives matter, then we're innately placing a different value on someone's life based on their skin color, which I would assume you would agree is racist by nature.

No, the issue is that we're not placing the SAME value on someone's life based on their skin color. Which is, in fact, the very definition of racism.
Quote:
Which is one of the reasons I have an issue with BLM. They appear to have done this intentionally, not to assist with the problem at hand (black lives being lost at greater rates than other groups), but to create conflict. [...] Hence my problem.

White Republican says black people are protesting wrong so it must be a conspiracy to cause problems for him. Film at eleven.

Edited, Jul 19th 2016 7:54am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#106 Jul 19 2016 at 6:58 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
The irony behind all of this is, if the "All lives Matter" people truly meant what they say, then they would be equally outraged when an unarmed black person is killed as they are with police officers. They would be out there protesting as well. However, they don't, because they are simply trying to counter the movement to bring attention to black lives, which is the opposite of saying "All lives matter".
#107 Jul 19 2016 at 7:31 AM Rating: Good
******
49,831 posts
gbaji wrote:
A far better approach is to avoid creating dual meaning terms and labels in the first place.
There isn't dual meaning terms and labels.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#108 Jul 19 2016 at 4:12 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
If black lives matter in some way other than all other lives matter, then we're innately placing a different value on someone's life based on their skin color, which I would assume you would agree is racist by nature.
Saying Black lives matter is different than Saying all lives matter because it's addressing the specific issue that it seems that black lives are treated as if they didn't matter.


Operative word being "seems".

Quote:
It's directly addressing a problem, and is not racist.


The problem is the disproportionate loss of lives among black men. The assumption is that this disproportionate loss of life is caused by a belief that black lives don't matter as much as other lives. I disagree with that assumption. I believe that the disproportionate loss of black lives is the result of a disproportionately high poverty rate among blacks in the US. But because of the way the organization has framed it's message and name, any disagreement with the assumption is transformed into a disagreement over the statement that "black lives matter", and is turned into an effective straw man to easily dispatch.

Which is a problem. It's structured, not to solve the problem (the disproportionate loss of life), but to create an argument over the words being used. You honestly don't find it odd that the bulk of the argument surrounding this group is literally over the issue of the language of "black lives matter" versus "all lives matter"? That's not accidental IMO.

Quote:
Saying all lives matter just shows you've completely missed the point.


No. It means that we completely got the point and are countering it. Because we're pointing out the innate problem with the word choice by the organization itself and how it does not accurately frame the problem and actually makes it harder to address and solve. As I stated above, the whole point of the label is to create conflict. Because we're given only two choices: Disagree with the label or accept a false assumption of the cause of disproportionate loss of life.

Of the two, I'm going to chose to argue against the label. Why? Because I actually care about the disproportionate loss of black lives and know that if we aim our efforts in the wrong direction, we're never going to fix that problem. BLM just uses that disproportionate loss of life to gain political and social power with no intention to fix anything. So yeah, I'm going to have an issue with that.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#109 Jul 19 2016 at 5:01 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,413 posts
Can I ask you a straight yes or no question?

Do you believe that a black persons life matters just as much as any other persons life?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#110 Jul 19 2016 at 5:12 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Almalieque wrote:
The irony behind all of this is, if the "All lives Matter" people truly meant what they say, then they would be equally outraged when an unarmed black person is killed as they are with police officers.


Correct. Because the phrase "all lives matter" somewhat assumes the addition of the word "equally" at the end.

Quote:
They would be out there protesting as well.


No. Because we recognize that the problem isn't with the police. Which is what the protests are aimed at. The problem is black poverty. Which is not what's being addressed by these protests. See how that works? I'm not going to join a protest that is pointing the finger of blame for a problem in the wrong direction. I'm going to point out as often as possible that these protests are pointed in the wrong direction.

Quote:
However, they don't, because they are simply trying to counter the movement to bring attention to black lives, which is the opposite of saying "All lives matter".


We're trying to counter the idea that the cause of the problem is some kind of systemic belief that black lives matter less than other lives.

The problem with BLM is that instead of starting with a problem and seeking solutions, it instead starts with an assumption of the cause, and protests that assumed cause. Worse, it attacks anyone who challenges their assumption by claiming that they are rejecting the problem itself. They will claim that if I disagree with a BLM protest, it means that I don't care about black lives being lost disproportionately. But what it really means is that I disagree that the disproportionate loss of black lives is the result of police valuing a black life less than other lives.

That's the root of the issue. But the use of the label "Black Lives Matter", and the rhetoric they use surrounding that label, makes it nearly impossible to have that conversation (doubly so when there are bull horns involved). Again, it's not about solving the actual problem, but using it for other purposes. Nothing BLM is doing right now will do anything to reduce the disproportionate loss of black lives. If they continue to do what they're doing for 20 years, it will still not have made any difference in that statistic. So what are they doing?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#111 Jul 19 2016 at 5:13 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Can I ask you a straight yes or no question?

Do you believe that a black persons life matters just as much as any other persons life?


Yes.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#112 Jul 19 2016 at 5:23 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If black lives matter in some way other than all other lives matter, then we're innately placing a different value on someone's life based on their skin color, which I would assume you would agree is racist by nature.

No, the issue is that we're not placing the SAME value on someone's life based on their skin color. Which is, in fact, the very definition of racism.


Yes. And I disagree that this is the cause of the disproportionate loss of black lives. See how that works? I'm not disagreeing with the statement that black lives matter just as much as all other lives. I disagree with the notion that black lives are lost at a disproportionately higher rate than other lives because there exists somewhere out there a systemic belief that black lives *don't* matter as much as other lives.

So when you create an organization and call it "Black Lives Matter", and you focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts protesting every time a police officer kills a black person, you are forming a narrative that this shooting occurred because the police officers involved did not value that black person's life as much as another person's life. That's the message that I disagree with. And frankly, when you look at the encounters that result in these shooting events, the one common factor to most of them is the lack of options given to the police officers involved. Michael Brown? So the cop should have just ignored two guys who matched the description of a recent robbery jaywalking down the middle of the street? Having been attacked by Brown, the officer should have just not pursued him and attempted to arrest him (which is kinda his job, right?). Having caught up with him, and Brown turning around and charging him, the officer should have just gotten into a fist fight with him instead of firing his weapon?

That's the kind of scenario I'm supposed to believe is the result of cops not valuing black lives? You're kidding right?

Quote:
Quote:
Which is one of the reasons I have an issue with BLM. They appear to have done this intentionally, not to assist with the problem at hand (black lives being lost at greater rates than other groups), but to create conflict. [...] Hence my problem.

White Republican says black people are protesting wrong so it must be a conspiracy to cause problems for him. Film at eleven.


No. I think it's just another in a long line of left leaning politically focused movements that claim solidarity or support for some minority group, but actually just take advantage of those groups conditions for their own ends. BLM has no desire to fix the problem. The existence of the problem empowers them. Heck. They'll do (are doing?) anything they can to make the problem worse, inflame passions, create riots and conflict. Because those are the bread and butter that they feed on.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#113 Jul 19 2016 at 5:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
White Republican says black people are protesting wrong on purpose so they have an excuse to riot, after the break. But first, Representative King talks about how white people are better than all the worthless subgroups of people.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#114 Jul 19 2016 at 5:31 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Let me also point out that by pushing the idea that police don't value black lives as much as other lives (or even desire to end black lives for some kind of mustache twirling reason), it actually creates fear in the black community with regard to interactions with cops, decreases trust in the cops by blacks, which increases the odds that a black person will not comply with a cop when stopped, or flee when approached by a cop (perhaps for something very minor), and thus increases the likelihood that any given police stop will result in a conflict and even death.

Which is only going to result in more black lives lost. Rather than focusing on some kind of training for cops on how they should handle an increasingly hostile group of people they have to encounter every day as part of their jobs, maybe BLM should be spending their efforts running workshops helping black people become more comfortable with cops, so that they aren't concerned that the cops are going to randomly shoot them, so that they don't do something stupid when a cop stops them, and thus don't get shot? You know, actually try to fix the problem (black lives being lost), rather than just stoking the flames of that problem. That's just a crazy idea though, right? Surely, we can all see how organizing marches and shouting things like "fry the pigs" is going to be far far more productive.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#115 Jul 19 2016 at 6:10 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Gbaji wrote:
No. Because we recognize that the problem isn't with the police. Which is what the protests are aimed at. The problem is black poverty. Which is not what's being addressed by these protests. See how that works? I'm not going to join a protest that is pointing the finger of blame for a problem in the wrong direction. I'm going to point out as often as possible that these protests are pointed in the wrong direction.
False. You see the protests as attacking police officers to avoid discussing racial inequality. Are some people attacking the police? Yes. Just like some of the police are racists. However, in both scenarios, those groups don't represent the whole.

Gbaji wrote:
We're trying to counter the idea that the cause of the problem is some kind of systemic belief that black lives matter less than other lives.

The problem with BLM is that instead of starting with a problem and seeking solutions, it instead starts with an assumption of the cause, and protests that assumed cause. Worse, it attacks anyone who challenges their assumption by claiming that they are rejecting the problem itself. They will claim that if I disagree with a BLM protest, it means that I don't care about black lives being lost disproportionately. But what it really means is that I disagree that the disproportionate loss of black lives is the result of police valuing a black life less than other lives.

That's the root of the issue. But the use of the label "Black Lives Matter", and the rhetoric they use surrounding that label, makes it nearly impossible to have that conversation (doubly so when there are bull horns involved). Again, it's not about solving the actual problem, but using it for other purposes. Nothing BLM is doing right now will do anything to reduce the disproportionate loss of black l
You act as if there is only one problem with a magical solution. You ignore the problems where black people aren't the root cause and only focus on the problems where black people are the root cause.

#116 Jul 19 2016 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Why don't black people just stop being poor? Then the police would leave them alone.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#117 Jul 19 2016 at 7:49 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,413 posts
gbaji wrote:
Which is only going to result in more black lives lost. Rather than focusing on some kind of training for cops on how they should handle an increasingly hostile group of people they have to encounter every day as part of their jobs, maybe BLM should be spending their efforts running workshops helping black people become more comfortable with cops, so that they aren't concerned that the cops are going to randomly shoot them, so that they don't do something stupid when a cop stops them, and thus don't get shot?


Yeah, and if those dumb women wouldn't dress so slutty, they wouldn't get raped!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#118 Jul 19 2016 at 8:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
maybe BLM should be spending their efforts running workshops helping black people become more comfortable with cops, so that they aren't concerned that the cops are going to randomly shoot them, so that they don't do something stupid when a cop stops them, and thus don't get shot?

Wow.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#119 Jul 19 2016 at 8:33 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
maybe BLM should be spending their efforts running workshops helping black people become more comfortable with cops, so that they aren't concerned that the cops are going to randomly shoot them, so that they don't do something stupid when a cop stops them, and thus don't get shot?

Wow.


Here's the wild thing. some BLM groups are actually doing this.

Also, that comments section is quality stuff.

Edited, Jul 19th 2016 10:35pm by Timelordwho
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#120 Jul 19 2016 at 8:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Certainly not opposed to things like that -- but I wouldn't call that a "workshop" where the implication is that blacks just need to learn how to act around police.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#121 Jul 19 2016 at 8:46 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Certainly not opposed to things like that -- but I wouldn't call that a "workshop" where the implication is that blacks just need to learn how to act around police.
Even if it were, that's not the solution to the problem of maltreatment. That's a countermeasure. People like Gbaji refuses to accept any wrongdoing against black people then claim to be upset when black people refuse to accept any wrongdoing of themselves.
#122 Jul 20 2016 at 1:51 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,345 posts
gbaji wrote:
So when you create an organization and call it "Black Lives Matter", and you focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts protesting every time a police officer kills a black person, you are forming a narrative that this shooting occurred because the police officers involved did not value that black person's life as much as another person's life. That's the message that I disagree with.
Disagree with it all you want; you'll still be wrong.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Last week, I saw a guy with an eyepatch and a gold monocle and pointed him out to Flea as one of the most awesome things I've seen, ever. If I had an eyepatch and a gold monocle, I'd always dress up as Mr. Peanut but with a hook hand and a parrot.
#123 Jul 20 2016 at 10:28 AM Rating: Good
******
49,831 posts
gbaji wrote:
So when you create an organization and call it "Black Lives Matter", and you focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts protesting every time a police officer kills a black person,
When you create an organization and call it the "National Football League," and focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts dealing with football ...

Edited, Jul 20th 2016 12:29pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#124 Jul 20 2016 at 11:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,407 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
So when you create an organization and call it "Black Lives Matter", and you focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts protesting every time a police officer kills a black person,
When you create an organization and call it the "National Football League," and focus the overwhelming percentage of your efforts dealing with football concussion-related coverups ...
Smiley: nod
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#125 Jul 20 2016 at 11:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I don't know why we're hearing about professional football concussions and not those related to professional flight archery #AllSportsConcussionsMatter
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#126 Jul 20 2016 at 1:35 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Why restrict yourself to head trauma, futbol players fall down sustaining serious injuries like upset stomachs and grazed knees all the time. Doesn't non-American football matter? Or do you just hate brown people? #AllFootballInjuriesMatter.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)