Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-30-2017 10:21 PM
408 online now:
CRR, jar, ThinAirDesigns (3 members, 405 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,897 Year: 10,503/21,208 Month: 3,590/2,674 Week: 133/873 Day: 133/76 Hour: 2/7

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
171819Next
Author Topic:   The Disgusting Berkeley Riots
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 226 of 275 (801196)
03-04-2017 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 219 by Modulous
03-02-2017 10:10 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
Well, it's true I would like to be convinced. I want to be sympathetic to the problems you are describing, and overall I think I am. I haven't spent a lot of time at the BLM site but did skim through some of it. I'm very bothered by the rhetoric "Black Liberation" movement. That's a page straight out of the Marxist movements of the sixties. I'm bothered by the raised arm with the fist. I'm bothered by the insistence that Trayvon Martin was murdered. Murders happen I'm sure but as I followed that case it didn't add up to murder. (This is the same reaction I had to the instances I listed earlier, the ones where a cop killed someone who came at him in a threatening manner during his attempt to deal with the man's crime. Even if the crime is petty the man was not innocent and crying injustice when a cop defends himself in such a situation is out of order IMO)

Perhaps most of the protestors are just fed up with the problems as you describe them, but the BLM rhetoric doesn't bode a peaceful protest to me. Even if most of their complaints have merit, there is still the problem of how their complaints are getting expressed in the BLM. And even if most of the protestors are peaceful there seems to be an inherent violence in BLM despite the peaceful motives of most of them (assuming most of them ARE peaceful):

Such as Leftist influence, Soros for instance, and violent elements including racist statements against white people, which may or may not be held by most participanhts in the movement. I just ran across this story for instance: Black Lives Matter Plotted to Burn Down Minnesota Capitol?

A former Black Lives Matter activist claims his comrades planned to burn down the Minnesota state capitol in Saint Paul and the governor’s mansion if the police officer who fatally shot a black man during a traffic stop had not been prosecuted.

Trey Turner, who describes himself as half black and half white, said in a YouTube video dated Feb. 27 that BLM activists planned to go on a violent rampage if Saint Paul area police officer Jeronimo Yanez had not been charged in connection with the high-profile shooting July 6, 2016 of the late Philando Castile, which they claim was racially motivated. 

The violence and advocacy of violence against white people by Black Lives Matter is well-documented.* 

In recent weeks, Yusra Khogali of the Toronto, Canada branch of BLM, said white people were “recessive genetic defects” and contemplated how whites could be “wiped out.” In Seattle a BLM supporter issued a profanity-rich call “to start killing people” including President Trump. The speaker also ranted against “white supremacy,” “capitalism,” “patriarchy,” and “anti-blackness,” dropping the F-bomb 55 times in the tirade. 

Last July, Micah X. Johnson, a sniper sympathetic to the movement’s goals shot and killed five Dallas area cops before being killed. Johnson’s shooting spree took place the day after Castile died and some say it may have served as a catalyst for the mass murder which happened during a Black Lives Matter march.

FrontPage readers need to be cautioned that so far Turner’s statement is uncorroborated.

[my emphases]

After comparing your persuasive descriptions with the other information I've been finding, I come to this conclusion: They no doubt have a decent case for their complaints, but the method of protest and the ideology of BLM is violent and destructive overall and it can't serve their cause well to resort to such methods. If what they want to do is bring the injustices to the attention of the public they need to adopt genuinely peaceful methods, even protest marches but like MLK's, not these that are based on Marxist hate rhetoric. There is a big divide, unfortunately, between the cause as you outline it, and the methods of the BLM as I keep discovering them.

======================

*From the link:

Founded by Marxist revolutionaries in 2013, Black Lives Matter (BLM) depicts the United States as a nation awash in racism, sexism, and homophobia, and openly promotes the murder of white police officers. Demonstrators at BLM events routinely: smear white police as trigger-happy bigots who are intent upon killing innocent, unarmed black males; taunt, and direct obscenities at, uniformed police officers who are on duty; throw rocks at police and threaten to kill them; and celebrate in the streets when a police officer is killed. Some examples of BLM's racist and incendiary rhetoric:

At a December 2014 BLM rally in New York City, marchers chanted in unison: "What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want it? Now."

At a BLM march in August 2015, protesters chanted : “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon.” (“Pigs” was a reference to police officers, and "blanket" was a reference to body bags.)

"FOUNDED BY MARCIST REVOLATIONARIES" says it all for me. If any of them are truly committed to a peaceful protest and a genuine resolution of the problems they want to highlight, they need to start a completely new movement.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Modulous, posted 03-02-2017 10:10 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by PaulK, posted 03-04-2017 3:45 AM Faith has responded
 Message 230 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 11:55 AM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12598
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 227 of 275 (801197)
03-04-2017 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Faith
03-04-2017 3:20 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
quote:

"FOUNDED BY MARCIST REVOLATIONARIES" says it all for me. If any of them are truly committed to a peaceful protest and a genuine resolution of the problems they want to highlight, they need to start a completely new movement.

But is it true, or just a lie from far-right propagandists ? It certainly looks like the latter, and - if it is - what is to stop the propagandists lying about any new group ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:20 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 4:56 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 228 of 275 (801202)
03-04-2017 4:56 AM
Reply to: Message 227 by PaulK
03-04-2017 3:45 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
I pointed out the Marxist theme in the BLM website itself. The "liberation movement" theme, the raised fist. If I read more of the site I'll probably find more.

abe: Oh, "pigs" for cops is a clue. Taken straight from the sixties Marxist playbook.

But that comes from the other site I see. However, if they did chant "pigs in a blanket" that ought to be possible to locate somewhere else. /abe

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by PaulK, posted 03-04-2017 3:45 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by JonF, posted 03-04-2017 9:06 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 247 by jar, posted 03-05-2017 3:42 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3514
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.3


(2)
Message 229 of 275 (801214)
03-04-2017 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Faith
03-04-2017 4:56 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
None of those are "straight out of the Marxist playbook".

E.g. "Pigs" for cops:

Online Etymology Dictionary and many other sources:

quote:
Probably from Old English *picg", found in compounds, further etymology unknown. Originally "young pig" (the word for adults was swine). Apparently related to Low German bigge, Dutch big ("but the phonology is difficult" -- OED). The meaning "oblong piece of metal" is first attested 1580s, on the notion of "large mass." Applied to persons, usually in contempt, since 1540s; the derogatory slang meaning "police officer" has been in underworld slang since at least 1811.

quote:
The pigs frisked my panney, and nailed my screws; the officers searched my house, and seized my picklock keys. ["Dictionary of Buckish Slang, University Wit and Pickpocket Eloquence," London, 1811]

You are assuming BS.

As usual.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 4:56 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 230 of 275 (801225)
03-04-2017 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Faith
03-04-2017 3:20 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
Well, it's true I would like to be convinced. I want to be sympathetic to the problems you are describing, and overall I think I am.

Good. Now that the protests, and those that support the need for protest like me, have raised your awareness - it's time to discuss how to deal with it.

I'm very bothered by the rhetoric "Black Liberation" movement.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm bothered by the raised arm with the fist.

Why?

I'm bothered by the insistence that Trayvon Martin was murdered.

Why?

Perhaps most of the protestors are just fed up with the problems as you describe them

Well that's what they say. Seems an important factor.

but the BLM rhetoric doesn't bode a peaceful protest to me.

Are you only looking at some rhetoric, or are you looking at the totality of it?

Even if most of their complaints have merit, there is still the problem of how their complaints are getting expressed in the BLM. And even if most of the protestors are peaceful there seems to be an inherent violence in BLM despite the peaceful motives of most of them (assuming most of them ARE peaceful)

So convince me.

Such as Leftist influence

Doesn't equate to inherent violence.

Soros for instance

There's no evidence of violence here.

and violent elements including racist statements against white people which may or may not be held by most participanhts in the movement.

Whether it is held by most participants seems an important factor in deciding this, does it not?

After comparing your persuasive descriptions with the other information I've been finding, I come to this conclusion: They no doubt have a decent case for their complaints, but the method of protest and the ideology of BLM is violent and destructive overall and it can't serve their cause well to resort to such methods.

A claim made against just about any successful protest in history. The success of the Civil Rights movement, of those fighting against the oppression of homosexuals and transgender people, those fighting anti-semitism.... The thing is, based on what you have said you have only innuendo ('leftist influence') and some individual cases. A large movement is composed of many people. Large numbers of people will always have elements you dislike. The Tea Party movement, for instance had elements who called for Obama to be hanged.

If what they want to do is bring the injustices to the attention of the public they need to adopt genuinely peaceful methods, even protest marches but like MLK's, not these that are based on Marxist hate rhetoric

Here's what they said about MLK's peaceful protests:

quote:
However, we are now confronted by a series of demonstrations by some of our Negro citizens, directed and led in part by outsiders. We recognize the natural impatience of people who feel that their hopes are slow in being realized. But we are convinced that these demonstrations are unwise and untimely.

We agree rather with certain local Negro leadership which has called for honest and open negotiation of racial issues in our area. And we believe this kind of facing of issues can best be accomplished by citizens of our own metropolitan area, white and Negro, meeting with their knowledge and experience of the local situation. All of us need to face that responsibility and find proper channels for its accomplishment.

Just as we formerly pointed out that "hatred and violence have no sanction in our religious and political traditions," we also point out that such actions as incite to hatred and violence, however technically peaceful those actions may be, have not contributed to the resolution of our local problems. We do not believe that these days of new hope are days when extreme measures are justified in Birmingham.


And of course MLK@

quote:
You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action. We have gone through all these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation.
...
You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
...
Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."
...
Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.
...
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws.


There is a big divide, unfortunately, between the cause as you outline it, and the methods of the BLM as I keep discovering them.

There have been some 2,000 protests by BLM. I've seen a handful of problems - some of them caused by right-wing people shooting or threatening to shoot BLM protesters. Having seen your research methods, I suspect you are looking for problems but not looking for the non-problems giving you a skewed impression.

I worry that you, and people like you, are allowing the media to tell you a story that distracts from the message of BLM: There are big problems still today and they need to be solved. Rather than worry that some people say things that sound a little too militant to you, that fewer still perform violent acts, that they disagree with you about certain specific incidents or they perform inappropriate gestures - let's find our common grounds. The police's interaction with black people is problematic and it results in innocent people dying, it results in petty criminals that don't deserve death getting killed. It results in cops dying. We need to fix this, agreed?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:20 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 2:01 PM Modulous has responded
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:34 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 231 of 275 (801229)
03-04-2017 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by Modulous
03-04-2017 11:55 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
I was in Berkeley in the sixties. I know Marxist symbols and rhetoric when I see them. The very term "Liberation" identifies it. We had Women's Liberation, Gay Liberation, Black Liberation, every kind of Liberation you can think of and it all came out of the Leftists, the Marxists, pushed by Cal professors, and radicals like David Horowitz who was one of the leaders there at the time. The raised fist is Marxist. Oh, and "Off the pigs!" was the cry from the Left when the police were called in to deal with their occupying University property among other things. Marxism makes pigs of people. I remember the air filled with tear gas from blocks away.

And Marxism is NOT peaceful. MLK sought to distance himself from that influence for that reason. Horowitz finally had his eyes opened when he realized that the Black Panthers he had been championing had murdered a friend of his, a good liberal woman who apparently knew too much.

The site I linked that gives the history of BLM as starting with Marxist revolutionaries is no doubt correct. I see no reason to doubt it. As it says, the violence of BLM is "well documented." Some associated with the movement have provided that information as was also shown. And the chants against cops sand rhetoric against the white race, it's all there.;

I'm doing my best to believe you that much of the movement is not violent and has no desire to be violent. But I don't know if that is true since the BLM origins and symbols are Marxist. And even if it is true they should leave a movement that promotes any form of violence whatever and model themselves on MLK instead. Also, stop trying to justify violent reactions to the cops who are doing nothing but responding to a crime call, and keep the focus on the harassment and threatening attitude they see in police work that singles out blacks and in black neighborhoods. They aren't going to get solutions to those problems with any degree of violence in their movement, cop killing, white bashing, Marxist symbology and rhetoric.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 11:55 AM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by JonF, posted 03-04-2017 2:35 PM Faith has responded
 Message 233 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 2:47 PM Faith has responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3514
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 232 of 275 (801233)
03-04-2017 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by Faith
03-04-2017 2:01 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
I was in Berkeley in the sixties. I know Marxist symbols and rhetoric when I see them

Does not follow.

For example, your idea that "pigs" for police is Marxist. You should now know it isn't.

Some of the Berkeley protesters were Marxists. Many were not.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 2:01 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:37 PM JonF has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 233 of 275 (801235)
03-04-2017 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by Faith
03-04-2017 2:01 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
I was in Berkeley in the sixties. I know Marxist symbols and rhetoric when I see them. The very term "Liberation" identifies it.

I doubt that. Convince me, don't tell me that you are convinced.

Women's Liberation

Maternity leave, action against domestic violence, voting, equal pay for equal work etc. All seem admirable goals to me.

Gay Liberation

You're going to have to work hard to persuade me this was a problem.

And Marxism is NOT peaceful

I see no reason it can't be, and certainly no reason to think it must be non-peaceful. I think tying Marxism in here is diluting the term Marxism into meaninglessness.

Further, I don't see why 'pacifism' should be the only or best way to deal with oppressive ideologies such as sexism, racism or homophobia. You yourself argued that taking a passive stance against the violent ideology of Islam is 'leftist snowflake' talk and won't be effective, right? Sometimes you have confront evil, and those that passively support it in ignorance with something more than complaining, agreed?

A little bit of trouble, disruption and even, unfortunately, violence is sometimes needed against those that don't listen to reason or passionate speeches.

The site I linked that gives the history of BLM as starting with Marxist revolutionaries is no doubt correct.

Talk me through it. I couldn't see any evidence presented that Alicia Garza is a Marxist revolutionary.

As it says, the violence of BLM is "well documented."

So show me.

I'm doing my best to believe you that much of the movement is not violent and has no desire to be violent

Do you support those in the movement in their aims/goals where their tactics are peaceful?

And even if it is true they should leave a movement that promotes any form of violence whatever and model themselves on MLK instead.

What's to stop the violent people from joining this hypothetical movement too? It's a loose umbrella term, not a rigidly organised group, after all. Black Lives Matter is more of a slogan than a specific group. There are some groups within the group that try to give direction and organisation, but they can't control every person.

Also, stop trying to justify violent reactions to the cops who are doing nothing but responding to a crime call, and keep the focus on the harassment and threatening attitude they see in police work in black neighborhoods.

As the evidence I posted earlier demonstrates quite categorically, the police are responding to crime calls, and performing spontaneous searches in a manner quite different when their target is black rather than white. This is a problem, and whether violence or anger or 'threatening' is justified or not, it should be understandable -yes?

They aren't going to get solutions to those problems with any degree of violence in their movement, cop killing, white bashing, Marxist symbology and rhetoric.

You said that you'd be more persuaded if BLM supporters publicly denounced violence etc. They do this, but you still lump them with the elements you dislike or distrust.

Again, I call for you to see the common grounds, fight with them to change the problems peacably and spend less time worrying about Marxism or some individuals saying things you disagree with. Magnify their good side, their cause, their dream. By all means follow it with a comment about some particular sections being problematic, but don't focus on the problems with the movement so much that the problems they are trying to draw attention to are lost. This tactic of suppressing a movement's grievances by zooming in on a few problems and exaggerating the elements that cause fear and uncertainty and doubt is old - but it should resisted.

They used this tactic against MLK too, remember? It was used against the Tea Party.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 2:01 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:25 PM Modulous has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 234 of 275 (801239)
03-04-2017 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Modulous
03-04-2017 2:47 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
You can address inequities for women, blacks, gays or any other group without Marxist Liberationism. I don't know if I can convince you that the term itself is the problem, it carries a ton of Marxist baggage.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 2:47 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 4:08 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 239 by RAZD, posted 03-04-2017 5:33 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 235 of 275 (801241)
03-04-2017 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by Modulous
03-04-2017 11:55 AM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
I wouldn't get anywhere trying to defend even the legitimate causes of the movement when there is any Marxist element or violent element or racist white bashing element involved in it. That's asking too much. Some enterprising blacks need to get together and make the case without the Marxism and the racism and the violence.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Modulous, posted 03-04-2017 11:55 AM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by jar, posted 03-04-2017 3:51 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 236 of 275 (801242)
03-04-2017 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by JonF
03-04-2017 2:35 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
You are splitting hairs which can only obscure the important points. "Pigs" was the term used against the police in the sixties "revolution," its origin is an academic distraction. Marxism was the engine that ran the show, why bother to mention that there were nonMarxist followers?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by JonF, posted 03-04-2017 2:35 PM JonF has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28702
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 237 of 275 (801246)
03-04-2017 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Faith
03-04-2017 3:34 PM


Marxism is legal in the US
Faith, you do understand that Marxism is certainly a legal and respectable political position in the US just as Communism or Socialism?

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:34 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 238 of 275 (801248)
03-04-2017 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Faith
03-04-2017 3:25 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)

You can address inequities for women, blacks, gays or any other group without Marxist Liberationism. I don't know if I can convince you that the term itself is the problem, it carries a ton of Marxist baggage.

If you can't persuade me, I reject your thesis in favour of an alternate.

I wouldn't get anywhere trying to defend even the legitimate causes of the movement when there is any Marxist element or violent element or racist white bashing element involved in it.

Why not? Why can't you fight racism just because some people fighting racism are in your view problematic? Many, if not most of the people that fought Nazis were communists - do you have difficulty defending the cause of defeating Hitler because of this?

Some enterprising blacks need to get together and make the case without the Marxism and the racism and the violence.

They have, you just seem to lump them in with those that you feel aren't and consequently ignore them or smear them with guilt by association or something.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:25 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18261
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 239 of 275 (801261)
03-04-2017 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Faith
03-04-2017 3:25 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
You can address inequities for women, blacks, gays or any other group without Marxist Liberationism. I don't know if I can convince you that the term itself is the problem, it carries a ton of Marxist baggage.

Okay, so stop using it.

I am not away of ANY of the groups I'm involved with calling themselves Marxist Liberationists.

But you seem to find them everywhere.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 3:25 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by Faith, posted 03-04-2017 5:46 PM RAZD has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24502
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 240 of 275 (801266)
03-04-2017 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by RAZD
03-04-2017 5:33 PM


Re: the big picture (BLM)
Follow the argument. I pointed out the Marxist influence on the BLM website, and I linked to a site that gives the history of the BLM as having been started by three Marxist revolutionaries.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by RAZD, posted 03-04-2017 5:33 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by JonF, posted 03-04-2017 6:46 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 244 by RAZD, posted 03-05-2017 9:09 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
171819Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017