• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Problems vs. Solutions and criticizing (e.g.), BLM

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
So far, you have absolutely refused to supply a single example of BLM dismissing perfectly acceptable solutions to the problem of police brutality/racism for reasons of "identity politics. You claim that this phenomenon is widespread, but are seemingly unable to offer absolutely anything at all in support of that claim.

What exactly
should I take away from that, pray tell?

Again, the point is that BLM's central claim is misguided. They have symptoms - which I agree that they should share - but they don't appear to have the expertise to create the best solutions. Police malfeasance is a relatively small problem that gets headlines but distracts us from getting to the far more consequential problems and focusing on solving those.
 

Tambourine

Well-Known Member
Again, the point is that BLM's central claim is misguided. They have symptoms - which I agree that they should share - but they don't appear to have the expertise to create the best solutions. Police malfeasance is a relatively small problem that gets headlines but distracts us from getting to the far more consequential problems and focusing on solving those.
And you are surprised that BLM activists would respond negatively when you call their efforts misguided, put their expertise under question, and dismiss one of the basic premises their entire movement is founded on.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
So you question the entire premise of BLM, and argue that they should refocus their efforts on an entire different area of political activity.
And you are surprised that this advice could conceivably draw ire from BLM activists.

We should ALL be wary of conflating symptoms with diagnoses and solutions. We should ALL be skeptical of anyone who dismisses expertise and critical thinking. BLM seems largely wrong-headed. Of course that opinion will "draw ire" from apologists for BLM, but who cares? Wrongheaded is wrongheaded. Do you somehow think we should shelter BLM from criticism? That seems like a form of soft bigotry, no?
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
We should ALL be wary of conflating symptoms with diagnoses and solutions. We should ALL be skeptical of anyone who dismisses expertise and critical thinking. BLM seems largely wrong-headed. Of course that opinion will "draw ire" from apologists for BLM, but who cares? Wrongheaded is wrongheaded. Do you somehow think we should shelter BLM from criticism? That seems like a form of soft bigotry, no?


Ya know what your problem is, boy?

You're uppity. That's what.
Tom
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I've heard of fires starting that way; overloading the socket or using the wrong kind of extension cord. I remember when I told my dad (who was an engineer) that I needed an extension cord for a space heater, he made sure I used the proper gauge. He also never wanted to use any light bulbs above 60 watts.
They (all girl house) put extension cords under mattresses & blankets.
Over-use & insulation raised temps to flammability.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
We should ALL be wary of conflating symptoms with diagnoses and solutions. We should ALL be skeptical of anyone who dismisses expertise and critical thinking. BLM seems largely wrong-headed. Of course that opinion will "draw ire" from apologists for BLM, but who cares? Wrongheaded is wrongheaded. Do you somehow think we should shelter BLM from criticism? That seems like a form of soft bigotry, no?
BLM & allies are a narrowly focused tribe.
I've found great difficulty discussing broader issues
cuz they appear to find that denial or dismissal.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry I missed this post. Things got real busy for a bit and my inbox got flooded.
Strictly speaking I agree. But in reality, society is going to tackle only so many things at once.
In reality there are hundreds of policy changes and legislation going at once and saying we could handle something like job services for poverty zones and tax disparity for corporations but not required bodycams and removal of immunity protections for police is, imo, an artificial scarcity argument. I can't see any reason why we can't do both things.
And initiatives like this get paid for by slicing through wealth and income inequality!!
Most cities pay extreme amounts to police services compared to other social services. You could also pay for it though that honey pot.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
This is another interesting topic (and BTW I largely agree with you on THIS point), but you're conflating the problem with the solution. IF we have confirmed a torn ACL, then it's almost certainly the case the the surgeon knows far better what to do than the patient.
If you confirm the ACL tear but miss the L5 bulge and systemic edema because you weren't properly listening to the patient then the solution will be incomplete, and cost the patient more while they plea for different doctors to look past the one injury and realize there's more going on. The surgeon will never be an expert on the patient's pain. Nor an expert in the comprehensive medicine they may need.

The incidence of police fatally shooting anyone is very low, and it doesn't appear to be skewed along racial lines.
Even if I agreed with this (I don't, total incidents dont reflect ratio per capita), racial profiling for arrests and charges does need to be addressed. As does the police brutality and paramiliterization of police.

Far more problematic is the income and wealth inequities in our society. So to BLM it might APPEAR that cops are the problem, but a more level-headed analysis would lead us to believe that cops aren't really the biggest problem by a long shot. Of course we can find horrific individual examples of cops doing horrible things. But if we follow only those examples (which BLM appears to be doing), then we'll be pursuing low impact solutions.
Again, I don't see why we can't do both. It's incidental to say that purging contaminated water from a system with a rusted pipe is not as effective as replacing the pipe in the long term, but you should still do it to stop the immediate problem of contamination. Do both, not one.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Again, I don't see why we can't do both. It's incidental to say that purging contaminated water from a system with a rusted pipe is not as effective as replacing the pipe in the long term, but you should still do it to stop the immediate problem of contamination. Do both, not one.

And this circles back around again..

You and I are having a civil discussion / debate. You might be correct, I might be correct, who knows? But we're open to having the discussion with each other. Hooray!

(And it's that lack of willingness by folks of the BLM ilk, that the OP is about.)
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
And this circles back around again..

You and I are having a civil discussion / debate. You might be correct, I might be correct, who knows? But we're open to having the discussion with each other. Hooray!

(And it's that lack of willingness by folks of the BLM ilk, that the OP is about.)
I don't think you'll find many BLM folk who don't also want to solve income disparity and wealth hoarding etc in this country.
The harshest sentiment I can see right now is, 'if you're not going through what I'm going through maybe don't tell me what I need to be focusing on right now.' Or less civil versions there of like 'stay in your lane' or '**** off.' Which, fair, imo.
Especially here in Portland, where police brutality is front and center.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
This is the crux of the OP. IMO "stay in your lane" is a really dangerous idea. In some ways worse than the ills they're protesting.
I disagree. There needs to be a cooperative effort but there's also a lot of outsiders talking over marginalized voices. Worse, 'let me tell you what's really is in your best interest' is condescending and will never be recieved well, or should be. People told to maybe quiet down and listen to marginalized voices get really defensive but honestly it's the perfect time to ask what they're experiencing and learn some first hand experiences. It's definitely not the time to offer up unsolicited advice. (And this includes me, too, a white straight cis woman who is often in LGBT spaces here in Portland.)

Historical factoid, it's what split off second wave feminism from first wave. White affluent women claiming to know what was best for women of color, and that the feminist movement was as much for them. POC women argued first wavers came from a huge place of privalege and simply did not understand or were listening to what they needed to have the same access to the feminist movement. First wavers got offended, doubled down on their restricted opinions, and second wave was born.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
The same way that people with torn ACL's should have a say in surgeon's procedures? (sorry for the snark, but that's not far from what many intersectionalists propose)
See, when you have to reach for unrelated analogies like this, it's because the point you're trying to make doesn't work with the actual subject at hand. White people have been making the decisions. White people have always had their say. And yet these problems continue to persist. So the point being made is that this must stop if there is ever going to be any real changes, made. The people being hurt by the ongoing problem of police brutality need to be given the power to effect change. That means the white people who have always had that power, and have always had their say, need to shut up and step back. Because they've already failed, over and over and over and over, to fix this problem. And that seems a reasonable observation, to me.

It's not about torn ACLs. It's about the white people in power persistently failing to fix a problem that was not hurting them, but has been hurting people of color for a very long time.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
There needs to be a cooperative effort but there's also a lot of outsiders talking over marginalized voices.

This is a false dilemma. While I'm sure this happens, it's not our only option.

Historical factoid, it's what split off second wave feminism from first wave. White affluent women claiming to know what was best for women of color, and that the feminist movement was as much for them. POC women argued first wavers came from a huge place of privalege and simply did not understand or were listening to what they needed to have the same access to the feminist movement. First wavers got offended, doubled down on their restricted opinions, and second wave was born.

I'm all for listening. I'm all for establishing strong lines of communication. But the BLM-style approach is simply substituting a new form of bad communication. As the Who said: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
White people have always had their say.

I must have missed those meetings!

Seriously, this identity politics approach is quite toxic.

First off, it's usually factually inaccurate. No good solutions can come from misunderstood premises.

Second, it doesn't bring us together as a community, it perpetuates and often widens the gaps between us.

Third, it often appears to fly in the face of reason and logic.

==

We citizens, of all colors, have a common enemy. This enemy is all to happy to see us bickering amongst ourselves. The enemy is the rise of the corporation and the oligarchs and plutocrats that run them. These Os and Ps have systemically corrupted the government at all levels and the lion's share of our leaders are in the pockets of the Os and Ps. The Os and Ps have installed a false "war on drugs", have privatized prisons, have gutted the middle class, have gutted our health care system, have gutted our healthy food supply and are close to destroying our environment. They have crippled our education system. They are parasites on our economy, not paying their fair share to maintain our infrastructure.

Now this is NOT some conspiracy theory. No secret cabals are necessary to explain how this happened. They each have their own army of the best lawyers who have found the same or similar ways to game the system.

Do you think they're worried about BLM? Quite the contrary, initiatives like BLM are playing right into their hands.

==

As I understand it, cops kill about 1000 people a year in this country - that's in the context of millions of hostile encounters. Of those 1000, far less than half are black. And of those, many are killed by officers of color. So while it's almost certainly true that a few score of POC are killed by racists cops, reducing those numbers won't make a dent on the lives of 99% of the POC in this country. Sure cops killing people is splashy. It's horrific, it's compelling, it's a tragedy.

And it's making us take our eyes off the ball.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That means the white people who have always had that power, and have always had their say, need to shut up and step back. Because they've already failed, over and over and over and over, to fix this problem. And that seems a reasonable observation, to me.

It's not about torn ACLs. It's about the white people in power persistently failing to fix a problem that was not hurting them, but has been hurting people of color for a very long time.

I don't know if it's as simple as "white people have always had the power" and should therefore "shut up and step back." Races are not monolithic groups where every individual is the same or has the same level of wealth and power. If you substitute the term "wealthy" for "white" in your sentence above, then it would read "wealthy people have always had their say and need to shut up and step back." That would probably be more accurate.

As far as the basic problem and those with the power to fix it are concerned, I've seen over the course of my life that most people (of all races) want to fix the problem. At least that's what they say, that's what the schools have been teaching, and that's the message of the mainstream media, academia, and the major political parties. Except for an infinitesimally small extreme minority of hardcore racists, nearly every white person in America falls all over himself to say "I'm not a racist." Even Trump says "I'm not a racist."

So, you have the vast majority of the US population ostensibly wanting to fix the problem. Pretty much every outlet in the mainstream media, everyone in academia, and the leadership of both major political parties - all claiming overwhelming support in wanting to fix the problem. This has been going on over the course of my entire life. We've also had landmark Supreme Court decisions, far-reaching acts of Congress (Civil Rights Act), the ending of segregation, and an active effort to change societal attitudes and perceptions about race.

Anyone who makes an openly racist remark - or even if they've been outed over something they said or did decades ago - they can expect to be skewered in the media and publicly tarred and feathered. This has been going on since at least the 1980s, exemplified by the infamous firing of Jimmy the Greek for being caught on camera making racist remarks.

You are correct that white people, by and large, have held the power in this country, but the whites who have been in power consider themselves "woke" and anti-racist. Because of this, they've apparently felt some sort of moral obligation to police other whites, restrain them from acting racist, and/or quash their malignant, toxic ideologies. It's just like the white executives at CBS sent the message when they fired Jimmy the Greek; they're trying to prove to the world that they're doing their part to rid this society of racism.

Yet here we are, decades later, and people are lamenting that the problem still hasn't been solved. From what you're saying, you seem to imply that the white people in power benefit from white privilege and therefore may have a conflict of interest. They may not really have any stake in wanting to end the problem of racism in this country, so all they're really doing is paying lip service and pretending to address the problem. Would that be an accurate assessment?

I'm not sure what the solution might be, but it does seem clear that whatever methods, strategies, and actions to fight racism in this country aren't really working very well. Maybe they were never intended to work, which would mean that all these white liberals and progressives who think they're "woke" probably aren't. They've been tricked and duped, and they don't even realize it. Many of them are still in denial, and we can even see examples of it here on RF.

Throughout all this, people of color have not been completely powerless, nor have they been silent. There are those who have had some measure of influence and power, at least in terms of being a part of the national dialogue on race. While it's true that whites have held most of the power, there are some vocal minorities whose voices are being heard. This also becomes a part of the narrative, especially since the OP's view has been echoed frequently with the idea that "if you haven't walked in the shoes of a person of color, you don't know what it's like."

But even that idea can backfire, since Trump has Black supporters, too. They can trot them out and say "There you see? There's a Black person supporting Trump. See? They're Black! And they say that all you white liberals and progressives are full of crap." They can also point to Biden's statement that if any Black person doesn't support him "You ain't Black."

This brings us to what may be closer to the core of the problem, the nature of politics in the United States. Politics is a corrupted, unscrupulous money game. What ends up happening is that people of all colors and creeds end up getting duped, tricked, and manipulated. We've had politicians who are people of color. We've had a Black president. But all of these politicians, regardless of their race, are still products of political machines and the corrupted system. I'm not claiming that they're puppets, but as with anything, if you give someone a stake in the game, then they're going to play it.

I think the only real solution will come with a complete restructuring of our political and economic system. In a way, we almost have to start over completely from scratch, at least in terms of examining the ideas, principles and attitudes upon which America was founded. I don't think it's wise to consider breaking up the country or anything like that; we can still maintain ourselves as an independent geographical entity and retain the infrastructure and resources necessary for the survival of the people. But we can't keep thinking of ourselves as "Europe Junior." We have to give up on American exceptionalism as well, in addition to Manifest Destiny, American Dream, Shining City on the Hill - all that crapola has to be flushed down the toilet. It was all propaganda anyway; it never reflected the reality of this country.

Another thing that might be mentioned is that, on a geopolitical level, our national origins are more closely paralleled by other former European colonies which also revolted against their rulers and formed independent governments, such as Mexico and many other nations in Latin America. However, our relations with our neighbors to the south have also been problematic, relating to the same problems of racism and imperialism which seem to never go away. But there's also an enormous potential if all of the peoples of the Americas could join together, unify, and pool their resources and manpower. America really can become great, and we wouldn't have to worry about China or Russia or NK or Iran. "White" people might become a numerical minority, and those who cling to the idea of "English only" might have to fall by the wayside. We would be a multilingual, multiracial, and multicultural country, but we could handle it. The benefits could really be worth it in the long run.

I think that's probably one way the problem could be solved. I don't really think it's because "white people don't know what it's like" or that the white people in power are all secretly racists to the core. Maybe some are, but I think most people in power are probably focused more on money and greed than wasting much time or energy on some racist agenda.

I honestly don't believe most whites in power are actively hating Black people; it's more a matter of passive indifference while publicly paying lip service to the cause of Black Lives Matter. However, I actually believe the problem is rooted in the kind of Eurocentric thinking that has dominated American political thought from the very beginning. Even white people who consider themselves enlightened and are basically good people with good intentions, they can't seem think outside of that box. Ideologically, we've painted ourselves into a corner, and we can't figure out what to do.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
This is a false dilemma. While I'm sure this happens, it's not our only option.



I'm all for listening. I'm all for establishing strong lines of communication. But the BLM-style approach is simply substituting a new form of bad communication. As the Who said: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

So you appropriate "our" and is the meta-boss over all the other bosses, because you Know. Sure, right, if you say so, because you are the expert, right?!! ;) :D
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
So you appropriate "our" and is the meta-boss over all the other bosses, because you Know. Sure, right, if you say so, because you are the expert, right?!! ;) :D

"our" society. All of us. No sub-tribes. No identity politics.
 
Top