[quote=“anon61221983, post:40, topic:63379”]
And I’m sorry, but comparing activists WHO ARE TIRED OF SEEING THEIR FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS DYING to the tea party, is just… that’s just crazy.
[/quote]You’re going to need to do a little less SCREAMING at me and perform a bit more re-reading of my post. I’m comparing the structure of BLM, not every member of BLM, nor their personal strifes or ideologies to Tea baggers.
For example, I’m a part of the BLM movement myself and I’m not defined by the Tea Party ideology, either.
[quote=“anon61221983, post:40, topic:63379”]
there are a number of communities when we use the term people of color and these different communites have different experiences with racism that we should address. But black lives matter is about the black community specifically
[/quote]Is this a top-down approach or just a rule you made up that no other POC should be involved?
First. I’m not screaming. You know I support sanders too.
Second, Soros has nothing to do with the founding and the workings of BLM. I have no problem with Soros financially supporting the movement, what does that prove? But I don’t think he has the same relationship with the movement as the Kochs have with the Tea party.
Again. People are dying. Black people are dying. Because too many white americans can come to grips with institutional racism. I want Sanders to continue to address all the issues that matters to me, including this one.
Did I say anything about other POC or whites not being involved in BLM? No. Please don’t put words in my mouth. I’m arguing here in full faith because I feel strongly about this. My point was that there is a specific issue that needs to be addressed. I have no doubt that Sanders can do that and he will if he gets the right kind of pressure.
You seem to be implying that Soros is more or less paying off BLM protesters to go after Sanders, in order to derail. You don’t want to come out and say that, but that seems to be the direction that you’re going. I don’t think that’s fair or accurate. It denies the activists who are fully aware of the stakes agency.
There’s evidence that Beyonce and Jay Z have also been financially supporting the movement in behind the scenes. When are we going to get conspiracy theories about the Beyonce controlled illuminati?
[quote=“anon61221983, post:44, topic:63379”]
First. I’m not screaming. You know I support sanders too.
[/quote]I didn’t think you were screaming at Sanders, I thought you were screaming at me.
[quote=“anon61221983, post:44, topic:63379”]
Soros has nothing to do with the founding and the workings of BLM.
[/quote]I didn’t say that he did. I said he has something to do with the core funding. If he’s not happy with BLM structure, etc. he can remove most funding with the flick of his wrist. There’s some amount of power and influence involved with that.
[quote=“anon61221983, post:44, topic:63379”]
I have no problem with Soros financially supporting the movement, what does that prove?
[/quote]It proves that the BLM can easily be under the thumb and whim of a billionaire. A “seemingly” bottom-up structure isn’t truly that way until it’s owned by everyone. For example, employee-owned co-op businesses have advantages over more rigid, corporate structures. Grassroots movements have a similar dynamic.
You may trust Soros for whatever reason, I do not entirely. I’m saying this as someone who has worked with him before. Others and myself in Colorado and across the nation worked with Soros to assist in getting marijuana legalized. We had a lot of success, obviously, but there were… shall we say… libertarian concessions that had to be made here and there. Concessions I’m not sure would be compatible with BLM under various circumstances (but hopefully so).
I trust true, bottom-up grassroots funding from many individuals as apposed to when it comes down from “on-high” with strings attached. And if you don’t think billionaires have strings attached to money and/or resources that cost money, then you don’t know corporatists firsthand like I do.
Agreed. However, he’s not going to do shit for us if he doesn’t get elected. He’ll probably retire. And, Hillary? Good luck, we’ll need it… desperately.
You said: "… black lives matter is about the black community specifically … "
It was pretty specific. If I misunderstood you, I apologize, but still read that as blacks only type deal. I’ll just take your word on it you meant something else.
[quote=“anon61221983, post:44, topic:63379”]
You seem to be implying that Soros is more or less paying off BLM protesters to go after Sanders
[/quote]I have no idea why the BLM absolutely refuses to go after Hillary Clinton nor even simply answer an open letter to the organization:
Frankly, a lot of progressive are perplexed by this and we want some fucking answers and soon or problems will escalate for BLM. I don’t want that to happen, but the BLM will bring that upon themselves.
[quote=“anon61221983, post:44, topic:63379”]
You don’t want to come out and say that,
[/quote]I would say it for certain if I knew it for certain. Otherwise, others and myself will make suppositions until BLM finally steps up to the plate with Hillary Clinton and stops making Sanders their punching bag.
As I’ve said before in the other Sanders’ thread, the BLM isn’t infallible and has been making core mistakes. Sanders and his supporters (many of whom are BLM supporters) have also made mistakes, but we’re thriving.
The last blunder a few days ago against Sanders now has many blacks across this nation very upset with the direction BLM is going. I suggest for the sake of the movement that course corrects itself and soon. For example, calling Sanders’ Seattle supporters “white supremacist racists” and other hyperbole against Sanders isn’t paving the way for a smooth relationship… AT ALL. (Yes, I yelled that last part)
I look forward to Sanders and BLM working together in harmony. It’'ll work out soon.
So it’s only derailing if “They” do it? It’s a short distance from there to here:
I understand BLM’s concerns and agree that the cause is just. The execution here? Um, why would anyone attack someone who is on their side? With a total outsider’s viewpoint, they looked like agent provocateurs TBH.
And with that outsider’s viewpoint, I can also see that wealth inequality is doing a better job of making more people miserable worldwide than gun-happy murder cops do in the US. The latter is a problem particular to the USA.
Meanwhile America is busy trying to export its own (huge) inequality problem to the rest of us in the form of so-called Free Trade Agreements and the exercise of its economic and military might.
Sanders looks like he might have a handle on that issue, so yeah, prefer to hear him speak over a couple of shouty people who appear an embarrassment to their own cause. If Sanders gets elected, he might get to do something about both problems and maybe he makes us all happy. The others don’t look too hot on either issue …
Most people I talk with don’t think they’re the same thing, but they do think they’re a bit symbiotic in many circumstances. Here’s an actual argument I’ve heard about Michael Brown (RIP).
Person One: Brown was forced into being around cops by being disadvantaged in various ways including the lack of free higher education, etc.
Person Two: Bullshit, that had nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, Brown was already enrolled in college.
Person One: Exactly, but how was he attempting to pay for it? By selling illegal cigarettes. If Brown had been able to go to college for free and also had other job opportunities that Sanders wants to provide for our nation’s youth – He never would have been put into that situation with cops in the first place.
Now that, of course, doesn’t eliminate racist cops, nor institutionalized racism by entire departments. However, what education and jobs does do is remove black youth from plenty of dangerous encounters with police.
Meanwhile, Sanders has already said that he wants to begin programs that bring people from within their own communities into their own local police forces. That way you have the community policing itself and people will personally know the officers and their families in the community. This way a cop doesn’t just see people within the community as random strangers and vice versa.
Also, keep in mind that economic justice is not an alternative to racial justice — it is a fundamental component of it. I think this article explains that concept quite well:
What Black Lives Matter gets wrong about Bernie Sanders
Beyond that, it’s up to you and me. It’s up to grassroots Americans getting involved in local, state and federal government. When there’s a problem with racism exposed, we need to do more than simply protest in the street, we need to get involved in local government, elect and inject good people that we vet as a community.
If a corrupt, local PD and politicians resist with unfair maneuvers and/or intimidation, etc. — That’s where the federal government (enabled via Sanders and grassroots movements at a state and federal level) will need to step in like the feds have done in the past and clean house.
We need to make racism in Police Departments not only a fireable offense, but also better communication between departments to keep offenders out of positions of authority. Not to mention, we need much better overseers at state and federal levels with more enforcement teeth to keep tabs on racism, corruption, etc. – and, here’s the kicker, we need much more transparency in government.
There’s also the reforms of the privatized prison complex, mandatory minimums, addressing mass incarceration via our failed drug war, etc. that will go an incredibly long way into making black lives matter much more than they do today within our current, fucked up, draconian system.
This just touches the surface, but this should give some ideas of what we’ll see with a Sanders presidency. There’s a huge grassroots dynamic that’s going to be needed. Sanders can’t bring that himself. We need to evolve as a nation, as a people. The great news is Sanders’ previous grassroots experience will assist him in enabling us to enable him and ourselves.
Please name the last candidate that even tried to enable average grassroots Americans to get involved within their own government after being elected? You really can’t. It’s fairly unprecedented and, frankly, we’re going to have to strategize some of this as we go along. Then again, that’s any administration for the most part as new challenges appear over the decades.
Now, none of this means shit if Bernie Sanders doesn’t get elected in the first place, so I’ve got work to do and I’m outta here tonight.
How long before 40-50,000 people? How long before the corporate media has to finally admit Bernie Sanders can really win the White House? The media doesn’t want to talk about it, but in states where Obama drew large crowds before 2008, it reflected later wins for him. I mean, they can shrug off 28,000 people this early in the race, I suppose, but it’s increasingly looking like denial.
Any maybe, just maybe, white Sanders supporters constantly hurling insults, often racially-charged insults, at black protestors every time the protestors do something they don’t like is the reason why they’re not getting on board? When the Sanders supporters start getting referred to as “BernBoys” to describe the type who are repeatedly targeted and harassing black women on twitter,
But now you’re attacking a woman for being a Christian, for being republican in high school, and accusing her of supporting “white genocide” for using a word the author admits he doesn’t even know what it means? Like seriously, if you tell me you weren’t an idiot in highschool over SOMETHING, all that tells me is that you haven’t matured, changed, or examined yourself, and you’re an idiot right now.
From one of the linked articles:
[quote]Forget about white privilege, what about Christian privilege?
…
Of course there is always something particularly depressing and disturbing about any African American clinging to Christianity.[/quote]
This is some SUPER racist shit, but of course as “good liberals” and “allies” it gets a total pass - this sort of paternalistic, talking down to, insulting, being a nasty shit gets at total pass. Because you’re “allies”, and if they want to stop being murdered, well, they better start listening to you, right?
“Forget about white privilege”. To that, all I can say is, Christ.
You want to know what more Sanders can do? Rebuke his white supremacist supporters.
Here are what some of those non-racist, open-minded, progressive atheist liberals had to say on the patheos link:
[quote]I’m Bernie Sanders, I fought for civil rights for black people in the 60’s. I even went to jail for my part of trying to get equal treatment of black people.
RACIST CIS WHITE MALE! PATRIARCHY! SANDERS HATES PEOPLE OF COLOUR! KILL ALL WHITE MEN!
The far left is eating itself, hopefully all these SJW types will have a civil war and kill each others twitter account.[/quote]
Except for all the African Americans who were in college when they were shot. Education and jobs doesn’t solve the problem of racism. When prominent black people in our society STILL get profiled, I think that illustrates what a major problem this is OUTSIDE of class. Class and race are not the same thing, they just aren’t.
BLM, or any other group has no obligation to support Sanders or any other candidate. Each candidate has an obligation to earn the support of various groups.
Many of these sites seem heavily weighted towards the democratic party… especially Daily Kos and democratic undergound. If you’re going to (unfairly) peg me as a Soros supporter, then you really shouldn’t be backing up your argument by using websites that tend to back the Dems. The American News X seems super-sketchy, and I’m not sure about the other… But it does have this:
Apparently
Johnson is unaware that Bernie Sanders was marching with Martin Luther
King Jr. before she was even born.
Marching with king was great and the right thing to do. But it was decades ago. There are still issues here today that need to be addressed and these groups are telling Sanders what they want to hear. I hope he’s listening instead of talking over them telling them what they should care about.
And this is an American election. Yes, foreign relations and global income inequality is a problem, but this is a specific problem here in the US that only the USA can fix.
Just wanted to point out this story, in case anyone missed it, because it illustrates my point beautifully:
A racist white woman had them change out the driver… I don’t think that this is a class issue.
I can see it going surprisingly far in the long run; people’s racial prejudices are constantly ‘confirmed’ by pretty much all the implications of black people being all but entirely confined to the lowest socio-economic classes. And these are the folks you’re unlikely to reach in the short term via any sort of campaigning, IMO… most of em don’t believe in evolution and figure their seat-of-the-pants trumps science.
I’m going to reiterate here… first, candidates, like Sanders should not get our votes and support by default. He (and others) need to earn it. It’s part of the duoplopy that the Dems/Repubs hold over the system that we feel inclined to support people, even if they don’t measure up. Second, if BLM doesn’t feel Sanders is up to snuff on their core issues, it’s up to him to prove other wise and to make that effort to prove otherwise. I do not think that standing solely on economic issues (as important as I believe they are) is enough. I do think he’s working to reach out and that’s a good thing. Last, there are shortcomings in our system which need to change, or we’re only going to get change through one of the two parties. Until we work to change that, those are likely our only choices for most national elections.
But why does he seem to be being singled out (is he, or is that just my perception)? Is it because he is the candidate seen as most likely to be responsive to their issues, or do they have a particular dislike of him?
Are BLM challenging any other candidate so directly? (and I agree that they should be doing)
I think Cow has made the same point lots of times. Most of us here are (substantially?) to the left of the mainstream Dem position, and much as we might like to see Jill Stein or whoever do better, it isn’t going to happen, right now it’s a two party system, the intent has to be to get the best candidate you can that can win and drive change (and with a Presidential Election, I really can’t see that ever changing). While at the same time pushing to break the duopoly at lower levels (cf. Kshama Sawant).
With a total outsider’s viewpoint, they looked like agent provocateurs TBH.
