Current Affairs The Landmarks of Slavery;

[Prevenger17]

And again, you can't disassociate the gesture from the meaning.

Well I can disassociate it from the meaning you and Millwall fans derive from it easy enough. Partly because I never made that link in the first place. When I see the knee, I think of Kaepernick, racial abuse suffered by players, awful monkey gestures and that type of thing.

Do you think if they did some other collective gesture, the Millwall fans wouldn't have booed it? What could they do that you would deem acceptable

 

[tsubaki]

No ffs that wasn't my point, at all, in any way. I was talking about the actual event - the Montgomery Bus Boycott - and the reaction to it; not giving a thorough overview on the life and works of Miss. Parks.

How is that not obvious? How much plainer can I make that point?

And do I really have to say I studied this subject at university before you wouldn't make a daft Wikipedia comment?

Baffling.

Its absolutely the point you were making. Rosa Parks is acceptable as an example because she did something non-violent that exposed the absurdity of racism, the same as MLK is acceptable because he supported non-violence. This is contrasted with BLM being not acceptable because they are "extremist".

The fact that both Parks and MLK did far more than that isn't mentioned, and indeed can't be mentioned because it would trash your argument.

 

[Tubey]

Well I can disassociate it from the meaning you and Millwall fans derive from it easy enough. Partly because I never made that link in the first place. When I see the knee, I think of Kaepernick, racial abuse suffered by players, awful monkey gestures and that type of thing.

Do you think if they did some other collective gesture, the Millwall fans wouldn't have booed it?

What, like hop on one leg or something?

In all seriousness, no, they wouldn't have booed it. I don't think that's even an opinion, I think it's borne out by the evidence.

I'm not blind to the fact Millwall have a broadly nationalist fanbase and will have more racists in their support than most due to the right wing nature of nationalism, but no, I'm convinced 2,000 people wouldn't have booed any gesture that was solely about anti-racism, and the evidence of that is the fact they aren't ritualistically undertaking monkey chants on a weekly basis in the stadium.

As that would be the logic; that they are routinely racist.

 

[Tubey]

Its absolutely the point you were making. Rosa Parks is acceptable as an example because she did something non-violent that exposed the absurdity of racism, the same as MLK is acceptable because he supported non-violence. This is contrasted with BLM being not acceptable because they are "extremist".

The fact that both Parks and MLK did far more than that isn't mentioned, and indeed can't be mentioned because it would trash your argument.

Nope, it's not mentioned as it's superfluous to what I was talking about - the Montgomery Bus Boycott. As I've just said. There's no need to mention it as I gave one specific example.

Indeed, the reason I gave that example was due to the legal undertaking that accompanied it. But as you second guessed I "wikipedia'd" it (despite that reply being given inside 7 minutes ffs), you probably missed that.

But yes actually in a way, because non-violence is key to winning hearts and minds in a moral argument, as you abandon the high ground when you don't. Was MLK perfect? No. Was his PR exceptionally good? Very much yes. And that's what mattered.

 

[TN Toffee]

This is exactly where you are going wrong - yes, Rosa Parks rode that bus. That isn't the be all and end all of her career fighting racism, and if you look further (even just read her Wikipedia article ffs) you'd see that she actually did far more of what you would then and now call political extremism.

I don’t know the full scope of what she spent the rest of her life doing, but I know she remained dedicated to fighting racism and educating people about the cause. I know this because I remember her coming and speaking to my elementary school class when I was 6 or 7 years old.

 

[Prevenger17]

What, like hop on one leg or something?

In all seriousness, no, they wouldn't have booed it. I don't think that's even an opinion, I think it's borne out by the evidence.

I'm not blind to the fact Millwall have a broadly nationalist fanbase and will have more racists in their support than most due to the right wing nature of nationalism, but no, I'm convinced 2,000 people wouldn't have booed any gesture that was solely about anti-racism, and the evidence of that is the fact they aren't ritualistically undertaking monkey chants on a weekly basis in the stadium.

As that would be the logic; that they are routinely racist.

I don't think they're all racist. I repeat, I think the booers are ignorant chumps with a scattering of actual racists

 

[tsubaki]

Nope, it's not mentioned as it's superfluous to what I was talking about - the Montgomery Bus Boycott. As I've just said. There's no need to mention it as I gave one specific example.

Indeed, the reason I gave that example was due to the legal undertaking that accompanied it. But as you second guessed I "wikipedia'd" it (despite that reply being given inside 7 minutes ffs), you probably missed that.

But yes actually in a way, because non-violence is key to winning hearts and minds in a moral argument, as you abandon the high ground when you don't. Was MLK perfect? No. Was his PR exceptionally good? Very much yes. And that's what mattered.

This is not what I said at all, as can be seen from the post itself. Nor is it a particularly accurate summary of your post either.

The last paragraph is a bit mad too - MLK didn't have exceptionally good PR, he was criticised repeatedly by his opponents for all manner of reasons (including similar arguments to the ones made here by you). What he did have was an argument that was clearly based on observable truth and was going after an injustice that was so blatant it couldn't be denied at a time when such things were less easy for a society to pretend didnt exist.

 

[dead_soft]

Nope, it's not mentioned as it's superfluous to what I was talking about - the Montgomery Bus Boycott. As I've just said. There's no need to mention it as I gave one specific example.

Indeed, the reason I gave that example was due to the legal undertaking that accompanied it. But as you second guessed I "wikipedia'd" it (despite that reply being given inside 7 minutes ffs), you probably missed that.

But yes actually in a way, because non-violence is key to winning hearts and minds in a moral argument, as you abandon the high ground when you don't. Was MLK perfect? No. Was his PR exceptionally good? Very much yes. And that's what mattered.

You keep coming back to this hearts and minds thing. What percentage of hearts and minds do you need that can only be converted through peaceful means? And do you ignore the places where violent resistance has worked?

You’d maybe have more weight if you mentioned that many civil rights protests actively attempted to instigate violence to be brought upon the protestors by the state but then it’s hard not to imagine you’d have suggested they had it coming.

And also, bit of a lol at your misreading of @tsubaki after telling everyone to read what you actually wrote

 

[Lapeno77]

I think the nation will only heal when the chief BLM recruiter is brought to task

 

[Tubey]

You keep coming back to this hearts and minds thing. What percentage of hearts and minds do you need that can only be converted through peaceful means? And do you ignore the places where violent resistance has worked?

You’d maybe have more weight if you mentioned that many civil rights protests actively attempted to instigate violence to be brought upon the protestors by the state but then it’s hard not to imagine you’d have suggested they had it coming.

And also, bit of a lol at your misreading of @tsubaki after telling everyone to read what you actually wrote

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

The authors found that the use of violence by an antiracist group against white nationalists led to decreased support for the antiracist group and increased support for the white nationalist group. Furthermore, the results were consistent with the theorized causal process: violence led to perceptions of unreasonableness, which reduced identification with and support for the protest group.

The '3.5% rule': How a small minority can change the world

Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts – and those engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change.

www.bbc.com

Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts.

Are peaceful protests more effective than violent ones?

“There’s certainly more evidence that peaceful protests are more successful because they build a wider coalition,” says Gordana Rabrenov.

news.northeastern.edu

There’s certainly more evidence that peaceful protests are more successful because they build a wider coalition.

“Violence can scare away your potential allies. You need the people on the sidelines to say, ‘This is my issue, too,’” she says. “For the people who say, ‘All lives matter,’ that’s true, but not all lives are in danger. You need to convince them.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/05/peaceful-protest-is-much-more-effective-than-violence-in-toppling-dictators/

etc. etc. bloody etc.

It's never the optimum approach.

I class "violence" as proactive antagonism as well. Extinction Rebellion glueing themselves to trains resulted in this:

Extinction Rebellion protesters dragged from Tube train roof

Extinction Rebellion says it will "take stock" of the reaction to the action for future protests.

www.bbc.co.uk

"I support their cause but I think how the protests have been carried out has led to more divisions."

Indeed.

If you have the moral high ground, you don't forfeit it. BLM spectacularly forfeited it and support for their underlying aims, which is obviously morally just, has dwindled. Because of their failure to win hearts and minds through their actions, the support for their cause has narrowed substantially to an increasing echo chamber.

Black Lives Matter support down since June, still strong among Black adults | Pew Research Center

55% of U.S. adults now express at least some support for the Black Lives Matter movement, down from 67% in June.

www.pewresearch.org

The longer this goes, the more ground is lost.

 

[tsubaki]

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

The '3.5% rule': How a small minority can change the world

Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts – and those engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change.

www.bbc.com

Are peaceful protests more effective than violent ones?

“There’s certainly more evidence that peaceful protests are more successful because they build a wider coalition,” says Gordana Rabrenov.

news.northeastern.edu

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/05/peaceful-protest-is-much-more-effective-than-violence-in-toppling-dictators/

View attachment 110481


etc. etc. bloody etc.

It's never the optimum approach.

I class "violence" as proactive antagonism as well. Extinction Rebellion glueing themselves to trains resulted in this:

Extinction Rebellion protesters dragged from Tube train roof

Extinction Rebellion says it will "take stock" of the reaction to the action for future protests.

www.bbc.co.uk

Indeed.

If you have the moral high ground, you don't forfeit it. BLM spectacularly forfeited it and support for their underlying aims, which is obviously morally just, has dwindled. Because of their failure to win hearts and minds through their actions, the support for their cause has narrowed substantially to an increasing echo chamber.

Black Lives Matter support down since June, still strong among Black adults | Pew Research Center

55% of U.S. adults now express at least some support for the Black Lives Matter movement, down from 67% in June.

www.pewresearch.org

The longer this goes, the more ground is lost.

Er - “narrowed to an echo chamber” followed by a article which says BLM support remains strong amongst Black Americans (also known people who are actually effected by the issue ?

Also it’s a bit much not to mention the role that the media, politicians and commentary plays in framing people’s views.

BLM are consistently described in a lot of reporting and especially by the GOP as extremist, violent, thuggish etc based on a completely unrepresentative sample of demonstrations or incidents, many of which aren’t anything to do with them.

Other groups aren’t described as much, even when they go far more off the mainstream. To take the most recent example, it’s not BLM saying people should pour their wealth, lives and efforts into overturning an election (or “fighting for Liberty like the Founders did in 1776”).

 

[Amw79]

Seems to me that when Kaepernick took the knee, he was massively criticised, called unpatriotic and told he shouldn’t protest like that.

When Black Lives Matter started gaining popularity, they were told ‘we don’t like the name, surely all lives should matter, what about white lives? You should change the name’.

When BLM larger protests happened this year, they were derided as a group, for the actions of a few, and told they were protesting in the wrong way, and it should be done peacefully like that nice Kaepernick lad did.

Now football players who make a peaceful, symbolic gesture are told, ‘we’re booing you because of supposed Marxist associations with the name of the movement, not the principle silly’.

Hard to see it as anything other than black people who dare to speak out get constantly told they’re doing it wrong, and should get back in their box.

 

[Tubey]

Er - “narrowed to an echo chamber” followed by a article which says BLM support remains strong amongst Black Americans (also known people who are actually effected by the issue ?

That's the part that goes totally over your head - the absolute essential need to have a broad appeal to change societal attitudes overall.

If you appeal only to black people, you are an echo chamber and changing very little. If your cause is morally just and appeals to everyone then you get lasting change.

 

[Tubey]

Seems to me that when Kaepernick took the knee, he was massively criticised, called unpatriotic and told he shouldn’t protest like that.

When Black Lives Matter started gaining popularity, they were told ‘we don’t like the name, surely all lives should matter, what about white lives? You should change the name’.

When BLM larger protests happened this year, they were derided as a group, for the actions of a few, and told they were protesting in the wrong way, and it should be done peacefully like that nice Kaepernick lad did.

Now football players who make a peaceful, symbolic gesture are told, ‘we’re booing you because of supposed Marxist associations with the name of the movement, not the principle silly’.

Hard to see it as anything other than black people who dare to speak out get constantly told they’re doing it wrong, and should get back in their box.

They're not beyond reproach. The central issue shouldn't be a shield to avoid all criticism of their methods.

The alternative is blindly agreeing to anything BLM want out of fear of being called a racist, regardless of how mental it is.

 

[Prevenger17]

The alternative is blindly agreeing to anything BLM want out of fear of being called a racist, regardless of how mental it is.

The players aren't BLM members. In fact, I'm not even sure BLM is a centralised organisation so much as a slogan used by hundreds of different groups and protests. The players are football players, doing a knee. That's all. You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder with BLM, did they topple a gnome in your garden?