Would it matter IF ...

[jjb54]

Here is a serious question and be honest:

 

Would it have mattered - IF - the following had a Trump 2020 MAGA Hat on ....

 

- Trayvon Martin

- George Floyd

- or any other Black that was killed ... by Police or otherwise ...

 

Would they be in the news and would the "FALLOUT" be as drastic ?

 

The answer is NO ... * IF * you are willing to be honest.

 

. o O ( Careful, because there were BLACKS killed with MAGA hats on and NO not limited to MAGA hats only .... and trust me you never heard about them. )

 

But * IF * George Floyd, for example had a MAGA hat on ... the "FALLOUT" would not even be a "note in the news", again IF we are honest.

 

Then you have to ask this question: BLM does it really care for BLACKS or, again if we are honest, only BLACKS that fit a very narrow and specific narrative?

 

Let the debate begin ...

[Arneercool]

What debate?

 

You have clearly already made up your mind.

 

And so have i.

 

There is no more "debate" to be had, so get with the program or get lost.

 

And before you all go yapping about fascism and free speech, no, just no.

[xrayy]

empathy and compassion is a gift, it is not in the dna. i was not aware that so many people act like that they never heard about it or even act like someone who just do not treat it as an important value.

[Shadowheart328]

Oh boy...here we go again.

Alright, for starters you are completely debating a made up issue as though it's some sort of fact, and it shows that you have almost no idea how BLM functions.

One of BLM's major points is addressing police brutality and law enforcement's skewed relationship with black minorities. It's not a political movement, it's a social/civil rights movement. It transcends party lines.
When BLM come out to protest, they are protesting against the unlawful treatment of all black Americans by police officers. And that's the key point: All black Americans. Nowhere does BLM say we support black people

but only if they are left-leaning or democrats. No where.

So you've completely made up the fact that BLM only cares about Democratic, non-Trump supporting black Americans, but act likes it's some sort of undeniable truth.

Secondly, I don't think you are actually trying to debate here, like Arneercool said, "What debate?" You're mind is already made up. I mean you say it yourself:

 

Would they be in the news and would the "FALLOUT" be as drastic ?

The answer is NO ... * IF * you are willing to be honest.

You already answered your own made up question, and imply that if you disagree, you are lying. That's not how debates work.

These are clearly arguments that are made to discredit BLM, and I think (If we are being honest) that you are simply looking for validation on those opinions.

---

But let me bite and address your point: BLM does it really care for BLACKS or, again if we are honest, only BLACKS that fit a very narrow and specific narrative?

First of all. Not a real question since you force an answer by implying that anything other than your opinion isn't being honest. But as to the point of if BLM supports all black people, then yes. The answer to that question is yes. Just visit their damn website, or actually talk to leaders in the movement.

Are you going to have individuals in the movement who think right-leaning black people who get brutalized by police get what they deserve? Yeah. But those are individual issues, and I feel like that's what the Right love to lean on and act like it's something an entire organization agrees with.
It's the same logic as assuming that everyone who works for a specific company is racist just because a single employee who worked for them happened to be. But if you look at the organization as a whole, their doctrine, what they are fighting for, and who they are fighting for is very, very
self evident.

[xrayy]

Oh boy...here we go again.

 

Alright, for starters you are completely debating a made up issue as though it's some sort of fact, and it shows that you have almost no idea how BLM functions.

....

it is very noble that you try to save this debate with facts instead of showing ignorance and alternative facts or pseudo questions. i really hope it works!

@topic initiator or similar thinking people:

but if i see what a president of the u.s (and so many leaders of other countries) can communicate as "alternative facts" blindly accepted or even believed and praised as the real facts and the best for the u.s. i doubt that debates like this one and the unity of the free thinking world can be easily saved.

as a german i'm more than happy and deeply thankful that the u.s. and their allies saved the world and germany from fascism and racism 75 years ago.

thank you america! but what happens to you now ? who let you think that alternative facts of a rich, cronically misinformed and ignorant soap entertainer are the strong foundation for a working democracy or at least the best option ?

it maybe entertaining and funny - even for some people serious - but it is a mistake to undererstimate such people! i recommend to study what happened to the fragile democracy in germany in 1933 and to learn from it until it is too late!

why do you post against BLM ? What is wrong with their goals or why to you try to discredit them ?

[Guest deleted34304850]

you can't argue with stupid

[HeyYou]

Black lives matter.... but, it seems, only when they are killed by police.

 

In the US, on average, cops kill about 200 blacks per year. Right around 500 whites are killed per year. Given that the press rarely reports about a white guy getting shot, it seems they are trying to give the impression that it doesn't happen. A tiny percentage of shootings are NOT justified. (maybe that should be "deaths at the hands of the police, as not all of them were shot.....) But, regardless of circumstances, if a black is killed, it makes the news, and the protestors come out in droves. If a white is killed..... crickets. Keep in mind, a fair few of the folks shot by police, are shot by black officers....... So, are we to believe that every white shot by a cop is justified? I find that highly unlikely.......

 

BLM also likes to say that black on black crime isn't the issue here. But, isn't that the underlying issue behind cops being more inclined to shoot black folks? Black are around 13% of the population, yet they account for better than 50% of violent crime....... Not to mention that almost every victim has had a pretty significant history with the police in any event. Most have been convicted felons, that have been in and out of prison...... some, several times. So, maybe the fact that blacks seem to be more inclined toward crime has something to do with the way police interact with them?

 

And then there is the whole black on black crime..... Blacks kill around 2500 of their own per year, including women and children. But, does BLM say anything at all about that? Nope. Even when little kids are killed sitting in their own living room at home..... If they are oh-so-concerned about black folks being killed, why don't they do something about one of the leading causes of death of blacks?

 

BLM also claims that 'black culture' in the inner cities isn't the issue....... but, once again, that rings rather false. When your entire culture glorifies the thug life, killing cops, 'sticking it to the man', etc...... teaches their children mistrust of the police, or any authority figure for that matter, how do you expect interactions with said groups are going to go? Unless/until THAT changes, nothing else is going to change either.

 

The same crowd screams about 'economic disadvantage'.... and how no one seems to want to open a business in their neighborhoods..... But, when their favorite response to a black person being killed by cops is burning down their own neighborhood, and looting/destroying businesses, is it any wonder folks don't want to open a business there? Not to mention the crime rate in said neighborhoods.... Why would anyone in their right mind want to open a business there????

 

And then there is 'profiling'. When the police do it, it seems it is a 'bad' thing.... but, when insurance companies do it, its perfectly ok. Along with a selection of other businesses....... Why is that?

 

BLM seems to want others to solve their problems. But, the problem becomes, until the underlying issues are addressed, that BLM denies ARE issues, there isn't going to be a solution. Same goes for the inner cities. Until the folks that actually LIVE there take steps to point their culture in a different direction, nothing there is going to change either. It simply cannot be forced by people from the outside. We have already more than adequately proven that.......

 

So no. I do not support BLM. An organization that was founded by marxists, and a convicted terrorist. They are in denial about the root source of their problems, which blows their credibility right out of the water.

[Oblivionaddicted]

To keep debating with facts:

-everytime a dictator makes a purge or a coup d'état it is helped by the police

-in the USA the Blacks are over-represented in the slum working classes which makes them more potential opponents

 

all these facts make there's always a big difference between the criminal cops and their victims: the social class

 

 

Racism has always been a very useful tool to turn away people's attention from the bosses who destroy employments by using 3rd World slaves or massacre thousands of innocents every year with their petroleum-based fuels, their chemical solvents in the clothes or their pesticides and carcinogenic food additives.

 

 

The police brutalities are strongly linked to the functioning of the usurped power and the struggle of classes.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Oblivionaddicted

[jjb54]

What debate?

 

You have clearly already made up your mind.

 

And so have i.

 

There is no more "debate" to be had, so get with the program or get lost.

 

And before you all go yapping about fascism and free speech, no, just no.

 

Do you even understand how DEBATES work?

 

Understand that in Jr High - High School I was on DEBATE TEAMS.

 

So what you just stated is - > NO < - you do not understand what a real DEBATE is.

 

I suggest you ... oh, here I'll do it for you:

 

 

Merriam Webster DIctionary -

 

debate verb

debated; debating

transitive verb

1a: to *argue about

the subject was *hotly debated

b: to engage (an *opponent) in debate

a governor debating her challenger

Choose the Right Synonym for debate

Verb

DISCUSS, *ARGUE, DEBATE mean to discourse about in order to reach conclusions or to convince. DISCUSS implies a sifting of possibilities especially by presenting considerations pro and con. discussed the need for a new highway ARGUE implies the offering of reasons or evidence in support of convictions already held. argued that the project would be too costly DEBATE suggests formal or public argument between opposing parties debated the merits of the amendment ; it may also apply to deliberation with oneself. I'm debating whether I should go ...

[Guest deleted34304850]

i like the dictionary definition move.

next up you should go for grammatical mistakes, but save the spelling mistakes for last - they're the ultimate trump card.