S
StudentMI
Guest
By whom? Just saying so isn’t convincing. You’ll post your sources, I’ll post mine and neither will budge.
- Status
C
childinthefaith
Guest
Of course they do, agree. However, after having read their “What We Believe” on their website, I am completely against the top tier of that movement. It is marxist and seeks to destroy the traditional family unit. I can’t support the banner because of that. However, my behaviors support the axiom with which I agree.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The website that you read is not a central authority for the Black Lives Matter movement, which is not centralized and not obliged to support everything you read on that website. The movement started two years before that organization even existed.LeafByNiggle:
Of course they do, agree. However, after having read their “What We Believe” on their website, I am completely against the top tier of that movement. It is marxist and seeks to destroy the traditional family unit. I can’t support the banner because of that. However, my behaviors support the axiom with which I agree.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Who, exactly, are the them you are referring to?childinthefaith:
That is wonderful. Oh, that everyone would think like you in that regard! Unfortunately they do not. And that is why we need to remind them that Black Lives Matter.
It is interesting that you give no benefit of the doubt to them (the racists) and merely assume they (the racists) exist out there and in significant numbers — at least in sufficiently significant numbers that they need to be “reminded” about their lack of “caring” for Black Lives. (Despite that you do not provide any evidentiary base or specific examples upon which to base your point.)
On the other hand, you dismiss outright that the movement behind Black Lives Matter (as distinct from the organization) has any discernible connection to rioting and looting.
Seems to me that this separation of the two is a convenient way to excuse those who are behind terroristic behaviours on the pretext that it is the “organization” and not the “movement” that is responsible. Funny how there is no one speaking for the “movement” who speaks to condemn the riotous behaviour seemingly being fueled by the organization; just those (like yourself) who let the “movement” off the hook by pointing fingers at the “organization” that doesn’t ostensibly speak for the movement.
Well, let’s see, did the scurrilous BLM mob that threatened and intimated the participants of the RNC after its closing represent the Democrats or was this BLM mob merely a disorganized horde with no connection to the Democrat Party or to the BLM “movement?” Yet, none of the Democrats have condemned the actions of the mob but seem, rather, to completely agree that intimidation and threats have a place in politics today — but only from one side. Neither are there Black Lives Matter “movement” endorsers who are condemning the mob as not representative of the movement.
Seems to me that it is very convenient for the “hands-off” Democrats and BLM “movement” endorsers to let the mob do the intimidating while they stand back as “innocent” and righteous bystanders, neither condemning nor endorsing the terrorism but attempting to profit from the proceedings nonetheless.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Right1cthlctrth:
This is a very inaccurate description of charter schools, which are constructed primarily in rich neighborhoods and are not a feasible choice for poor kids stuck in poorly performing schools. The Democrat’s solution to that would be to hire more teachers for smaller classes (like they have in rich neighborhoods) and better facilities (like they have in rich neighborhoods), and ensure that all children have decent nutrition (like rich kids have). But taking money away from schools in poor neighbors and giving it to charter schools just reduces the quality of education for the poor. The Democrats oppose that.
.And why are you not making it your project to convince the wealthy liberal and progressive Democrats who currently send their children to elite private schools to stop doing that and seriously consider making it their mission to improve the quality of education in impoverished areas by having their own offspring attend those schools so they can experience first hand the lack of “quality of education” there?
I am certain that by “taking” their “money away” from the private schools these wealthy Democrats currently support would make a huge difference in improving the “quality of education for the poor.”
It won’t happen, will it?
Why not?
Because the wealthy progressive Democrats have no real empathy for the poor nor any desire to make a difference to their lives. What they want is to wipe out the middle class completely, which is currently the only cohort that stands in the way of their globalist, technocratic elitist vision for the world. The elitists are completely absorbed in the transference of wealth from the middle class in the developed world to the “third world,” or to their own pockets. The current lockdowns and who is benefitting (or not) is a clear indication that small business owners are being targeted for extinction.
In the meantime, states like New York and California will not permit results-based charter schools from operating in empty public school rooms or buildings. In New York, 50 000 students are on wait lists trying to get into charter schools — NOT in “rich neighborhoods” as you say, but in their OWN impoverished neighborhoods; in fact, often in the very same public school they currently attend.
The problem isn’t the detrimental effects on the public schools, the problem is that these charter schools demonstrate that schools can operate in impoverished areas and do well even with limited resources provided that rigorous academic and behavioural standards are promoted.
Short version…
Longer, more detailed, version…
And from a California teacher…
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Please, no more outrageous . . . statements!
What percentage of charter schools are located in poor neighborhoods?
Last edited by a moderator:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Whoever it is that still does not treat people justly because of their race.
I don’t have to assume it. The statistics show that they exist and that they have an effect on the lives of people of color.
If they have a connection it is that they are both motivated by the same injustice. But some of them respond peacefully and some of them respond violently.
Nope. I never excused terroristic behaviors.
Y
yankeesouth
Guest
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The cardinal’s statement only applies to the specific organization and website of blacklivesmatter.com. It does not apply to the movement as a whole, which is not beholding to this particular organization, but is rather a decentralized grass-roots movement that does not share the positions cited in the article.
S
StudentMI
Guest
Unfortunately it also does apply to quite a big part of the movement which, while decentralized, does engage in property damage and rioting.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
What you call “a big part of the movement” is not part of it.
S
StudentMI
Guest
So the rioters are just a fringe group? Come on.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
In pure numbers, most definitely. It only takes a very few violent people to cause a lot of damage. But hundreds of thousands can march peacefully and make hardly a ripple.LeafByNiggle:
So the rioters are just a fringe group? Come on.
Anyone can coordinate. The don’t need to be part of the Black Lives Matter to do it. But I don’t think you have even proven there is such coordination, beyond the obvious connection of all of them being driven by the common outrage over racial injustice.
R
RuthAnne
Guest
Black Lives Matter appears to be an advocate group for reelecting Trump. They’re doing a good job of it.
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
Black Lives Matter’s goal to defund police is based on a faulty premise.
In the article, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Joseph Cesario of Michigan State University and David Johnson of the University of Maryland assess hundreds of fatal police shootings since 2015. Their groundbreaking study exposes what is, at least for the anti-police mythmakers, an inconvenient truth indeed.
According to Cesario and Johnson, who analyzed crime data from more than 200 U.S. counties, the strongest predictor of being shot by the police isn’t a person’s race, but whether the person is engaging in violent criminal behavior .
Police officers off all races are statistically less likely to shoot a black than a white person under the same circumstances.
And BLM is acting AGAINST what most Blacks want.
A new Gallup poll, conducted between June 23 and July 6, shows that 81% of black people want the same amount or more policing in their neighborhoods, which breaks down to 61% wanting the police presence to stay the same and 20% saying they would like an increased police presence.
In the article, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Joseph Cesario of Michigan State University and David Johnson of the University of Maryland assess hundreds of fatal police shootings since 2015. Their groundbreaking study exposes what is, at least for the anti-police mythmakers, an inconvenient truth indeed.
According to Cesario and Johnson, who analyzed crime data from more than 200 U.S. counties, the strongest predictor of being shot by the police isn’t a person’s race, but whether the person is engaging in violent criminal behavior .
Police officers off all races are statistically less likely to shoot a black than a white person under the same circumstances.
And BLM is acting AGAINST what most Blacks want.
A new Gallup poll, conducted between June 23 and July 6, shows that 81% of black people want the same amount or more policing in their neighborhoods, which breaks down to 61% wanting the police presence to stay the same and 20% saying they would like an increased police presence.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
That does not mean that a person’s race is no predictor at all. It is just not the strongest predictor.
N
Naga
Guest
That there is significant coordination occurring in the violence we are seeing has largely been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Here is a press conference from the Chicago Police Department which demonstrates this clearly. The relevant portion is from the beginning until about 11:25:
Do you acknowledge that the violence depicted in this video shows a degree of organization beyond a bunch of individuals deciding to engage in acts of violence independent of one another?
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You misunderstood the kind of coordination I was objecting to. I was not claiming there was no coordination among the rioters. There clearly was such coordination. The claim I was refuting was:
(name removed by moderator):
I was objecting to the charge that there was coordination between the rioters and the peaceful protesters making up “the movement”. I do not consider opportunistic criminals as part of the Black Lives Matter movement.
(name removed by moderator):
(bolding mine).
I was objecting to the charge that there was coordination between the rioters and the peaceful protesters making up “the movement”. I do not consider opportunistic criminals as part of the Black Lives Matter movement.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Right. Then we’ll move from words to images.HarryStotle:
Please, no more outrageous . . . statements!
Last edited:
- Status