Do BLM or ALM?

[Antonio the Sixth]

BLM (not a racist or a moron who completely misses the point).

[Taco Truck 🚚]

So black cops killers over represented by 320% and blacks killed by cops over represented by 250%? Sounds like they're getting off pretty lightly.

The numbers doesn't include the 25% where race is not reported, also the policed killed something like 1000 in average annual in the period shown, while only 28 cops were killed in 2013 and there was only 29 people taking part in the killings.

The stats are not relevant because it show that African American people deserve to be shot, what make them relevant that they show through the African American overrepresentation among cop killers, that African Americans are more likely to have a violent interaction with cops both as "victim" and "perpetrator", which indicate that higher violent crime rate is likely a significant part of why African Americans are more likely to be shoot than White Americans.

Yeah which is why drug use amongst whites in DC is higher than blacks but blacks are arrested way more for drug offenses then whites.  It's because the black race deserves it.

I have always found murder to be the most interesting statistic for violent crimes for two reasons; it's the hardest to hide and most murderers are caught. Around 50% of murderers in USA are African American (most of the victims are other African Americans), this give us a general idea that African Americans commit more violent crime than White people, this also make them more likely to have to interact with the police as the perpetrator of a crime. These things are basic facts.

Hhmm  You just can't bring yourself to admit that black people are policed disproportionately regardless of what statistic you conjure up.  This may come as a shock to you but only a vanishingly small number of black people ever murder anyone.  Unfortunately a large number of black people are rammed through the criminal justice system simply because they are black.  And once that happens then they can't get a job and are forced into the illicit economy... where you show up and say, "see I told you black people are bad."  The overwhelming majority of black people who kill someone don't just wake up one day in a wealthy suburb and start shooting people.  There is usually a long serious of events some of which start before they are born that culminates in them eventually being in a bad situation.

Some facts for you...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/13/nypd-stop-and-frisks-15-shocking-facts_n_1513362.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/05/stop-and-frisks-still-no-fun-for-blacks-latinos.html

Anyone that defends that is a monster.  90% of the people stopped and felt up in front of a street full of people were totally innocent.  And even that 10% of "bad" people includes people that got a summons for things like jay-walking and it doesn't even include all the people who showed up in court and had the charges dropped or were found innocent.

I would love for a horde of black police officers to do a sweep like that through a white neighborhood every day for years and then see your statistics.

One more thing for the racists...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/13/nypd-stop-and-frisks-15-shocking-facts_n_1513362.html

[Adam Griffin]

Ugh, white Europeans in this thread are (mostly) the worst. I can't wait until their entire continent is 40% minority, the sky doesn't fall, and we all really get to see what's in their hearts.

[ingemann]

I have at no point denied that African Americans suffer under discrimination, but I'm of the opinion that make it a black and white issue (as in lacking nuance, not as in race) you will never deal with main problem behind the greater crime and incarnation rate among African Americans; poverty, it's not like the vast majority of White people who are killed by and kill cops are middle class either. But you can choose to focus on the symptons rather than deal with cause. Of course stopping the war on drugs and reforming the American justice and prison system will help too, but getting more African Americans (and Americans in general) out of poverty should be the main focus. BLM is in my opinion a worthy cause, but it doesn't help, it just create increased hostility between African American communities and the police.

[ingemann]

Ugh, white Europeans in this thread are (mostly) the worst. I can't wait until their entire continent is 40% minority, the sky doesn't fall, and we all really get to see what's in their hearts.

First of all I'm not sure how Europe will ever turn into 40% Muslims (that what you mean), but I can tell you if the sky doesn't fall, you won't see THE EVIL IN MY HEART, you will only see that if the sky falls.

[Adam Griffin]

Ugh, white Europeans in this thread are (mostly) the worst. I can't wait until their entire continent is 40% minority, the sky doesn't fall, and we all really get to see what's in their hearts.

First of all I'm not sure how Europe will ever turn into 40% Muslims (that what you mean), but I can tell you if the sky doesn't fall, you won't see THE EVIL IN MY HEART, you will only see that if the sky falls.

To be fair, it probably doesn't have to get anywhere near that for a good show to erupt. Europe is what right now - 10% minority at most? - and you guys are already going positively fycking bonkers over it. White Europeans have forgotten how to reproduce and the policies with regards to immigration are bound to change, so the projections right now I think are absolutely irrelevant. Sooner or later, you guys are going to have to be busing in a Syrian refugee crisis' worth of immigrants every single year just to keep your social safety nets in semi-functioning order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_dUmDBfp6k

[Marokai Backbeat]

Black Lives Matter.

[Vosem]

While it is clear what the "Black Lives Matter" slogan is trying to communicate (it is a response to the perception of society that they don't), the slogan itself is pretty alienating (it is easy to interpret as meaning "Black Lives Matter", to the exclusion of other lives, though that isn't what most of its users mean) and has not much chance of winning anyone over, and is in that sense pretty useless. So, voted "All Lives Matter", because it would be a more effective slogan for the same movement and because the phrase is literally true and impossible to misinterpret.

[politicus]

Ugh, white Europeans in this thread are (mostly) the worst. I can't wait until their entire continent is 40% minority, the sky doesn't fall, and we all really get to see what's in their hearts.

First of all I'm not sure how Europe will ever turn into 40% Muslims (that what you mean), but I can tell you if the sky doesn't fall, you won't see THE EVIL IN MY HEART, you will only see that if the sky falls.

To be fair, it probably doesn't have to get anywhere near that for a good show to erupt. Europe is what right now - 10% minority at most? - and you guys are already going positively fycking bonkers over it. White Europeans have forgotten how to reproduce and the policies with regards to immigration are bound to change, so the projections right now I think are absolutely irrelevant. Sooner or later, you guys are going to have to be busing in a Syrian refugee crisis' worth of immigrants every single year just to keep your social safety nets in semi-functioning order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_dUmDBfp6k

This is a deeply flawed argument for a number of reasons, but a few points:

1) Low reproduction rates makes it harder to accept immigration in ethnically defined states, not easier, simply because it changes the ethnic balance more. It is therefore more likely to lead to tighter immigration policies than laxer. Becoming a minority in ones own country over a couple of generations is the primordial fear behind anti-immigration sentiments in Europe.

2) Reproduction rates vary a lot across Europe. 1,7 as in DK is manageable, while 1,1 in parts of Southern Europe isn't. The problem is a sharp drop, not a gradual decline. Making this a continental wide problem is erroneous.

3) You do not need to have a 100% reproduction rate to have a good society. Automatization and a more gradual retirement pattern makes it possible to secure a high standard of living with a gradually declining population.

4) Most Europeans do not want the kind of labour market with low minimum wage and low benefits, that would be required to successfully integrate a large influx of immigrants. Many employers and right wing think tanks love the effect immigration will have on the labour market, but the average voter don't.

5) Europe is a small and densely populated place. Many Europens were looking forward to cashing in a "green dividend" from declining population in the form of less pressure on the environment and infrastructure, more nature, and more available housing. Immigration forces us to retain a "use all available resources to the fullest" model.

Then there is a number of problems related to the type of immigrants Europe attracts:

6) Labour market participation among non-Asian immigrants is low. In fx Sweden this hasn't increased for 15 years. So immigration ends up being a burden on top of the skewed age pyramid, not a solution.

7) Children and grandchildren of immigrants generally do worse in the educational system than "natives". A large group ends up as a permanent unintegrated underclass, which drains the system (this group also has a high crime rate, which is costly).

8 ) There are fewer and fewer unskilled jobs. We already have a large pool of unemployed unskilled workers (many from the ethnic minorities already in Europe). It is generally more sensible to "upgrade" unskilled European workers than receiving immigrants. Youth unemployment is extremely high in several countries.

9) Vocational and technical training in the Middle East and Africa is sub-standard, and this is the groups Europe could use.

[politicus]

The green countries in this stat do not really have a declining population problem and a lot of the countries with shrinking population are in Eastern Europe, which doesn't attract migrants.



So the demographic argument should at least be reserved for the relevant countries - not an "all Europe" argument. A lot of the low fertility countries are in Eastern Europe, which doesn't attract immigrants.

Lack of public daycare, kindergartens etc. is a major factor in keeping birth rates down in "the yellow countries" and changing this would be cheaper than experimenting with mass immigration.

[Slander and/or Libel]

While it is clear what the "Black Lives Matter" slogan is trying to communicate (it is a response to the perception of society that they don't), the slogan itself is pretty alienating (it is easy to interpret as meaning "Black Lives Matter", to the exclusion of other lives, though that isn't what most of its users mean) and has not much chance of winning anyone over, and is in that sense pretty useless. So, voted "All Lives Matter", because it would be a more effective slogan for the same movement and because the phrase is literally true and impossible to misinterpret.

So should "impossible to misinterpret" be the filter through which we have to pass every expression of sentiment? What about bad actors who will intentionally misinterpret things for their own ends? For instance, Fox News knows that BLM is not in favor of cop killing, but they say day in and day out that BLM is a terrorist organization bent on killing police. Is this because they chose the wrong name?

[Vosem]

While it is clear what the "Black Lives Matter" slogan is trying to communicate (it is a response to the perception of society that they don't), the slogan itself is pretty alienating (it is easy to interpret as meaning "Black Lives Matter", to the exclusion of other lives, though that isn't what most of its users mean) and has not much chance of winning anyone over, and is in that sense pretty useless. So, voted "All Lives Matter", because it would be a more effective slogan for the same movement and because the phrase is literally true and impossible to misinterpret.

So should "impossible to misinterpret" be the filter through which we have to pass every expression of sentiment?

Slogans should be chosen that are difficult to interpret, not one whose meaning changes when you stress the incorrect word.

[Zioneer]

The first three statements are all technically true, but "Black Lives Matter" is the only one that makes remote sense as a political statement right now.

I basically agree with this image:



I also agree with those who are saying that the CNN question was stupid.

Yeah, Black Lives Matter would've avoided a lot of controversy if they would've added "too" or "also" the end of their name.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Fox would still have found a way to call them cop killing terrorists. Of this I have no doubt.

[Figueira]

the slogan itself is pretty alienating (it is easy to interpret as meaning "Black Lives Matter", to the exclusion of other lives, though that isn't what most of its users mean)

I never understood how anyone could possibly interpret it this way. It never even crossed my mind until people started saying "All Lives Matter."

[Figueira]

The first three statements are all technically true, but "Black Lives Matter" is the only one that makes remote sense as a political statement right now.

I basically agree with this image:



I also agree with those who are saying that the CNN question was stupid.

Yeah, Black Lives Matter would've avoided a lot of controversy if they would've added "too" or "also" the end of their name.

I really don't think it would have. The only people who have a problem with the phrase "Black Lives Matter" are racists.

[Zioneer]

The first three statements are all technically true, but "Black Lives Matter" is the only one that makes remote sense as a political statement right now.

I basically agree with this image:



I also agree with those who are saying that the CNN question was stupid.

Yeah, Black Lives Matter would've avoided a lot of controversy if they would've added "too" or "also" the end of their name.

I really don't think it would have. The only people who have a problem with the phrase "Black Lives Matter" are racists.

I think it would remove any possibility of misinterpretation, whether willful or just ignorant. I feel like people who don't really think about race don't quite get the implication of saying "All Lives Matter" as opposed to "Black Lives Matter", but "Black Lives Matter Too" would remove any confusion about it. The photo makes that very point, that people are confused.

[Slander and/or Libel]

I think it has to be a willful misreading to think that they're saying only black lives matter. There's just no other place where people apply this logic. If someone says "cancer sucks," nobody thinks they're implying that no other diseases suck.

[BaconBacon96]

Don't be stupid, lives don't matter.

[Figueira]

The first three statements are all technically true, but "Black Lives Matter" is the only one that makes remote sense as a political statement right now.

I basically agree with this image:



I also agree with those who are saying that the CNN question was stupid.

Yeah, Black Lives Matter would've avoided a lot of controversy if they would've added "too" or "also" the end of their name.

I really don't think it would have. The only people who have a problem with the phrase "Black Lives Matter" are racists.

I think it would remove any possibility of misinterpretation, whether willful or just ignorant. I feel like people who don't really think about race don't quite get the implication of saying "All Lives Matter" as opposed to "Black Lives Matter", but "Black Lives Matter Too" would remove any confusion about it. The photo makes that very point, that people are confused.

The people who say "All Lives Matter" as a simple declaration are often not racist. However, the people who vandalize "Black Lives Matter" signs, replacing them with "All Lives Matter," are racist.

[Zioneer]

I think it has to be a willful misreading to think that they're saying only black lives matter. There's just no other place where people apply this logic. If someone says "cancer sucks," nobody thinks they're implying that no other diseases suck.

You'd be surprised how stupid people can be when confronted with a charged political topic, even if they haven't deeply thought about it.

[Slander and/or Libel]

I don't disagree, but a lot of this isn't being driven by people just honestly misinterpreting things. It's being driven by people with agendas who know better cynically misinterpreting things. Then you get the honest people being convinced by the dishonest nonsense.

[Famous Mortimer]

I think it has to be a willful misreading to think that they're saying only black lives matter. There's just no other place where people apply this logic. If someone says "cancer sucks," nobody thinks they're implying that no other diseases suck.

Similarly, if someone says "all diseases suck" no one screams at them that "you don't think cancer sucks?"

It's not that by saying Black Lives Matter you are saying other lives don't, I don't think anyone honestly believes that.

The problem is the shouting down of people saying All Lives Matter.

The first people to say "All Lives Matter" were not racist, they were other liberals. They weren't even trying to avoid saying "Black" it was just that the slogan hadn't been agreed on yet.

Then the intersectionalist brigade came along and started shouting them down. As they always do now, they insisted that saying "all" and treating everyone equally was racist and that the only way to be not racist is to treat races differently.

Then conservatives came along and started pushing back and adopted the All Lives Matter line for themselves. Liberals were too cowardly but conservatives didn't mind because they're already labeled racists anyway.

[mencken]

bobloblaw be like

Kelly Thomas will be delighted to know that his life does not matter, or at least would be if he were still alive. I guess if he were a few shades darker and trying to grab his assailants' weapon his death would be a tragedy.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Nobody was saying "All Lives Matter" until it was as a response to "Black Lives Matter". Can you see how in that context, caterwauling about the intent of those saying "All Lives Matter" is more than a little disingenuous?