• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why I, a liberal, disagree with the BML movement

I have already. :shrug:



Children from 64 would be adults today, don't let the word trigger you white winger. And a national and federal response to local police misconduct is hampered by the Republican party in Congress and the current President who refuse to address police brutality and yet wants to bring swat teams and secret police to bear on protesters. Go cry about it if the truth bothers you. :shrug:

The Feds do not control the city police.

So how can you blame the FEDS?

Trump treats the Federal buildings as Lincoln treated Ft. Sumter.
 
no, you misunderstood, that was a calculation of black billionaires in the world, not US black 1% earners. I provided '07 data on blacks in the 1%.

I have no idea why a guy in New Brunswick, CN, would be getting upset about the BLM movement in the US. If you are truly concerned, I suggest you research the underpinnings of the BLM movement, especially in light of your belief that systemic racism does not exist in US law enforcement.

1) I did a calculation on numbers provided me, and I think I misread the meaning of how they were presented. I remember he re-presented the numbers, I won't try to discredit that.

2) America affects everyone. The one remaining super power and our neighbour. I admired Obama, I thought he was a singular genius and beautifully eloquent, and well suited to the challenges of the day. Then came Trump, who seemed the very antithesis of Obama... and soon after the citizenry lost it's collective mind. It's especially sad to see what I considered 'my side' go completely haywire. It's to the point that some seem to have lost all sense of direction, and disagreement with Trump will precede any critical thought necessary to support any opinion. It seems it's step 1)disagree with Trump 2)now think about how I can rationalize the position. Same construct applies around anything that happens to a minority 1)racism! 2)rationalize the position. Same construct applies to any left mainstream view 1)I already know my conclusion 2)how do I now rationalize it.

It's just sad is all. This is not liberalism.
 
It's illiberal.
 
So, continue your "thought", bob.....since Seattle ONLY has a 7% population of blacks, Black Lives Matter should not be there.....because....?
Sure..... happy to repeat

.... read my link .... oh lord what I do for the very poorly informed.

Seattle Demographics
According to the most recent ACS, the racial composition of Seattle was:

White: 67.99%
Asian: 15.05%
Black or African American: 6.99%
Two or more races: 6.78%
Other race: 2.32%
Native American: 0.58%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 0.29%

My comments were not that BLM should not be there, but they need to go after Democrats.
 
The Feds do not control the city police.

So how can you blame the FEDS?

Trump treats the Federal buildings as Lincoln treated Ft. Sumter.

The DOJ did start compiling data on police misconduct in various cities near the end of Obama's administration which the incoming Trump administration promptly shelved. Asking local prosecutors who work with local cops to turn around and prosecute those cops for misconduct is not the ideal solution.
 
You aren't making an argument. You are expressing an opinion.

This is actually true. I guess I was looking for a good argument to convince me that BLM isn't what I think, but, yes... noted.
 
The DOJ did start compiling data on police misconduct in various cities near the end of Obama's administration which the incoming Trump administration promptly shelved. Asking local prosecutors who work with local cops to turn around and prosecute those cops for misconduct is not the ideal solution.

Prove the DOJ ended such date collection.

However, had this been a Fed problem, Obama would have solved it unless you claim he was not competent.

The Feds can only be involved in Federal crimes and not state jurisdiction matters.

Barr for instance was revolted over the Rodney King matter so he used a different path to prosecute the cops that beat him.
 
1) I did a calculation on numbers provided me, and I think I misread the meaning of how they were presented. I remember he re-presented the numbers, I won't try to discredit that.
so your math was not "accurate", even after you tossed in the US black population for an article describing world billionaires.

2) America affects everyone.
The topic is BLM.
The one remaining super power and our neighbour
What happened to China?
I admired Obama, I thought he was a singular genius and beautifully eloquent, and well suited to the challenges of the day.
Meh, he was totally stymied by the GOP House, which caused a lot of pain for @ 5 years, but go on, the topic is BLM and its effect on a Canadian.
Then came Trump, who seemed the very antithesis of Obama... and soon after the citizenry lost it's collective mind. It's especially sad to see what I considered 'my side' go completely haywire. It's to the point that some seem to have lost all sense of direction, and disagreement with Trump will precede any critical thought necessary to support any opinion. It seems it's step 1)disagree with Trump 2)now think about how I can rationalize the position. Same construct applies around anything that happens to a minority 1)racism! 2)rationalize the position. Same construct applies to any left mainstream view 1)I already know my conclusion 2)how do I now rationalize it.

It's just sad is all. This is not liberalism.
Not one single bit relating to why a guy in Canada is upset with BLM....unless you are arguing that BLM related protests are a "collective loss of critical thinking" by US liberals.
 
I agree that everyone sees race, I don't say I don't notice a person's colour. I'm saying it isn't an important aspect of a person that I would look up to, befriend, or make any other judgement upon.

Perhaps you don't fave racism toward black people, and perhaps that's why you are so annoyed by it being treated with such importance. Why can't people stop treating it as some big thing, and just look at each other as people, and reduce the conflict, you might ask.

People tend to project, and to have their own experiences and views color how they see issues. Sometimes that's 'good', sometimes 'bad'. Liars and thieves tend to think everyone lies and no one can be trusted. 'Honest' people tend not to see corrupt politicians for what they are, and to give them much too much credibility for 'good intentions'.

I strongly oppose racism rationally, but I've come to realize that despite this, I have some racism in me - how I 'feel' toward people. It's hard to change how I 'feel'; but then I can choose what I do. If I see a black person and think something negative, I can instead talk to them in a friendly, respectful way; I can fight for good principles, for their rights.

And people need to learn to listen to others a bit, and realize their experience might be different. If a black person seems obsessed about racism, that might be largely because they have a different experience with it. That doesn't mean they're always right about it, that they can't make mistakes, but it doesn't mean their having different views is wrong, either.

I remember a time when a lot of Canadians seemed to care a lot about 'acid rain' coming from the US. A lot of people in the US really did not care. It didn't affect them. Perhaps that's an analogy that might have some resemblance if you're someone who doesn't feel or get subjected to racism, to how you think others treat it too importantly.

I will admit I've had a thought at times 'man, black people seem way too obsessed about racism'. And then comes a bit more learning and thinking and realizing some of what I said above - and a need for me to support justice for them. They way to have them less obsessed by racism isn't for them to shut up, it's for racism to affect them less, which we can help with, a little. Like voting for politicians who will support justice, not pandering to whites.

This is one example of a more general political problem. You can see it pretty universally in cultures. India with history of castes, Japan's racial superiority over other Asians, Russian sense of superiority over some others in the region, pretty much anywhere.

If women weren't half the population, and playing a big role in men's lives, would their equality and right to vote have been finally more respected as they have even now? A basic issue for politics is how to get 'universal principles' respected, so majorities support justice for people even when they're not affected. And the 'annoyed' people who fight against that justice not because they're really against it, but that they aren't affected, are a problem.
 
My comments were not that BLM should not be there, but they need to go after Democrats.
Thats funny, 'cuz you said:


This is a run down on Seattle WA where BLM wages an unholy war. For them to be there, seems as if a lot of Blacks must live, correct?

Well no.
That was your point, blacks make up a small percent of Seattle's population, they should not be in Seattle.

So...go on...
 
so your math was not "accurate", even after you tossed in the US black population for an article describing world billionaires.

The claim was 0.6% of the black population was in the top 1%. I did the math correct from the numbers I was given. The numbers were later reframed.

What happened to China?

It's an emerging super power, but I'd happily stick with America to provide the moral high ground when compared to China.

Not one single bit relating to why a guy in Canada is upset with BLM

You're right, I didn't get to the point. In a nutshell, I see the party of reason devolving into chaos, cheap antics and promoting division in an attempt to garner power. The party is one of ideology first, and rationalizing that position after the fact. I had previously assumed this was a right wing phenomenon with religion, but I was wrong. There is no more party of reason in America, and if there is, it is now more likely to be conservatives. It affects me because problems in America spill over into the rest of the world, destabilization in America can become a worldwide problem.
 
Perhaps you don't fave racism toward black people, and perhaps that's why you are so annoyed by it being treated with such importance. Why can't people stop treating it as some big thing, and just look at each other as people, and reduce the conflict, you might ask.

People tend to project, and to have their own experiences and views color how they see issues. Sometimes that's 'good', sometimes 'bad'. Liars and thieves tend to think everyone lies and no one can be trusted. 'Honest' people tend not to see corrupt politicians for what they are, and to give them much too much credibility for 'good intentions'.

I strongly oppose racism rationally, but I've come to realize that despite this, I have some racism in me - how I 'feel' toward people. It's hard to change how I 'feel'; but then I can choose what I do. If I see a black person and think something negative, I can instead talk to them in a friendly, respectful way; I can fight for good principles, for their rights.

And people need to learn to listen to others a bit, and realize their experience might be different. If a black person seems obsessed about racism, that might be largely because they have a different experience with it. That doesn't mean they're always right about it, that they can't make mistakes, but it doesn't mean their having different views is wrong, either.

I remember a time when a lot of Canadians seemed to care a lot about 'acid rain' coming from the US. A lot of people in the US really did not care. It didn't affect them. Perhaps that's an analogy that might have some resemblance if you're someone who doesn't feel or get subjected to racism, to how you think others treat it too importantly.

I will admit I've had a thought at times 'man, black people seem way too obsessed about racism'. And then comes a bit more learning and thinking and realizing some of what I said above - and a need for me to support justice for them. They way to have them less obsessed by racism isn't for them to shut up, it's for racism to affect them less, which we can help with, a little. Like voting for politicians who will support justice, not pandering to whites.

This is one example of a more general political problem. You can see it pretty universally in cultures. India with history of castes, Japan's racial superiority over other Asians, Russian sense of superiority over some others in the region, pretty much anywhere.

If women weren't half the population, and playing a big role in men's lives, would their equality and right to vote have been finally more respected as they have even now? A basic issue for politics is how to get 'universal principles' respected, so majorities support justice for people even when they're not affected. And the 'annoyed' people who fight against that justice not because they're really against it, but that they aren't affected, are a problem.

I'm sorry I didn't yet respond to your earlier post, but I can find no fault with them. Your position is reasoned and convincing, and you're right, I likely suffer from a degree of isolation living in Canada. Thank you for this.
 
The claim was 0.6% of the black population was in the top 1%. I did the math correct from the numbers I was given. The numbers were later reframed.
I made a mistake in my analysis and said the top 1% when it was closer to the top 0.1%, and had you read the article I linked to, you would have seen both that and the 0.6% figure. The 0.6% figure was a result of taking 13 black billionaires divided by the 2,153 total billionaires. Your math was correct but solved a problem that was never posed to you.
There is no more party of reason in America, and if there is, it is now more likely to be conservatives.
I have to disagree with that. Neither party seems overly rational to me as people approach the fringes of both. I find people who have more diverse views, reaching across the aisle, in each party and people who consider themselves more Independent to have a higher likelihood of adhering to rational and logical thought. Unfortunately, we also see people like yourself who have mislabeled their lean and skew those results, though I would consider you a more moderate conservative that still falls in that range.
 
"I'd invite you to read my post history, I'm liberal on most positions. Also, trying to discredit my character doesn't invalidate my argument. I'd be interested in actual rebuttals to my point."
So... where is this whining?
The whining begins when you accuse people who disagree with you of attacking your character. No one did that. They simply stated the obvious, i.e. that you are clearly pretending to be something you are not: a liberal. That's not an attack on your character. It's calling "b.s." to the very premise of thread title (i.e. that your opinions should be taken seriously because you are "a liberal"). You presented a false flag, then attempted to play victim about it. That was a weak, contrived complaint (i.e. a "whine").
  1. To me, the need to constantly insert racial arguments into discussions where there is none, is racial obsession.
  2. I believe this to be an aspect of ACTUAL RACISM (emphasis yours),
  3. ...that is to say, the belief that one's race is an important qualifier when considering that person's value, importance,...will lead to further conflict and division along those lines.
Ok, so let's get into it. Virtually everything, above, is misguided.
1. If you believe that protesting AGAINST racism is "inserting racial arguments where there are none"...you simply do not understand what racism is...and you are not a liberal. This is a standard white grievance perspective.
2. WRONG. Opposing racism is NOT "racism". It's the exact opposite, in fact. Just because YOU (and others) feel personally offended and/or aggravated by public opposition to institutional racism, doesn't make those protests "divisive". It is the height to white entitlement that allows you to presume that that which offends YOU, is therefore "divisive" in our society. Again, this is a white grievance argument. And it's counter-factual to the point of be just absurd.
3. This is just nonsense. A pure Strawman. Again, NO ONE has even suggested (much less attested) to this. Who has EVER said that "race is an important qualifier when considering one's value, importance, etc."? No one. Ever. So why hold up this Strawman as if it's a valid argument? This is ANOTHER common white grievance refrain, firefly.
I don't think anything is divisive about protesting against racism. BLM has devolved into something much different.
Says whom? You? Again, your predilection for ambiguity, and it's becoming more and more clear why.

Upon what basis do you believe this? #BLM is about opposition to institutional/systemic racism in general, and overt racism and police misconduct in our legal system, in particular. And, honesty, the VERY LAST people on earth to define #BLM...will be aggrieved white conservatives who don't have he first flipping clue about racism.

So again I ask you...WHO exactly is being "divided" by protests AGAINST racism throughout this country? Second request.

I agree that everyone sees race, I don't say I don't notice a person's colour. I'm saying it isn't an important aspect of a person that I would look up to, befriend, or make any other judgement upon.
And what makes you think it's any different, for black people? This strikes me as the argument of someone who passes judgment from afar, not someone who has any familiarity with the other side of the equation. Do you know many/any black people? It's not a crime to not know, or not have any familiarity with the black community. But, in such a circumstance, it would be mindful for one to understand that.

I find this disturbing. You seek to know my racial identity before coming to further conclusions about me, and that is very revealing my friend.
Enough with the fake victimhood stuff, please. Enough. Is this going to be an honest discussion, or not? And again, you are too easily "disturbed". Your opinions reflect who you are. Why are you so easily threatened? This is a discussion about race and racism. If you don't understand that TALKING about race/racism (as subject matter) is NOT "racist"...you're not prepared to have this discussion.
 
I'm Canadian, as revealed in my profile. My ancestry.ca DNA reveals mostly Southern Italy, Turkey, Spain, Irish, in that order Let my racial identity now inform your opinion of me
My opinion of you is that you don't seem to have much understanding of the issues and perspectives of people of color in the U.S...and that you come to this discussion with a very different set of LIVED, LEARNED experiences. That seems to be confirmed now. The issue now is who, between us, has credibility with respect to the issues raised by the #BLM....and who just THINKS he understands?

But you didn't answer my other questions.
  • Do you honestly believe that the protests are about "insignificant differences" and that they "demonize" all white people?
  • Have you not been paying attention? If so, what news sources are you relying upon for this conclusion?
  • Lastly, what EXACTLY do you believe "the far left activists" are trying to achieve (and how)?
 
I made a mistake in my analysis and said the top 1% when it was closer to the top 0.1%, and had you read the article I linked to, you would have seen both that and the 0.6% figure. The 0.6% figure was a result of taking 13 black billionaires divided by the 2,153 total billionaires. Your math was correct but solved a problem that was never posed to you.

Fair enough.

I have to disagree with that. Neither party seems overly rational to me as people approach the fringes of both. I find people who have more diverse views, reaching across the aisle, in each party and people who consider themselves more Independent to have a higher likelihood of adhering to rational and logical thought. Unfortunately, we also see people like yourself who have mislabeled their lean and skew those results, though I would consider you a more moderate conservative that still falls in that range.

I don't think I quite understand. Are you saying I'd be considered an independent in the US or moderate conservative?
 
I was recently replying to someone else in another thread that became polluted in racial arguments where none had been brought up initially. While replying, I re-read what I had wrote and found it to be concise enough that I think it summarizes my problems with wokeness in general and BML in particular, (below is paraphrased).

I assume that others like me are tired of racial obsession. Some of us don't need or want to place any emphasis on a person's race as any special qualifier for different treatment, because we see each other as people. Some people we like, because we like how they think and behave, some people we grow tired of because of their antics. Long live MLK! We're all basically the same, why is this so hard to understand?

There is of course the alternative, where we focus primarily on insignificant differences and place enormous importance on that, and start dividing each other on that basis, to demonize the other without regard for who they are beyond their skin colour. I wonder if we can find any examples of the outcomes of this type of thinking in history?

I'd consider carefully what far left activist are trying to achieve and the manner in which they are trying to achieve it. It's for these reasons I reject the BLM movement as a destructive, divisive movement.

In my opinion, such movements are simple reactions to perceived forms of inequality. The right wing is just as bad. Some black people cannot jog in some neighborhoods without attracting unwanted harassment. Would we even have these problems if the right wing did not have a problem with equality?


The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
 
I don't think I quite understand. Are you saying I'd be considered an independent in the US or moderate conservative?

I would suspect your views fall under moderate conservative based on the small sample size I have seen in this thread.
 
Back
Top Bottom