The Real Outcomes of BLM

The DoggFather

OG DF
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
106,385
Reaction score
117,485
If you haven't been to Miami, you would like the Art Deco Buildings.

I went on two tours of Art Deco Buildings both outside and inside.

Photographers heaven if you enjoy building architecture.
Just watch Scarface or play GTA Vice City lol
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
A 5 year old indigenous kid gets gangraped by kids ,is it because of the possibility it was indigenous kids who raped the child there is no false social media outrage ?
Media in Australia are more interested in reporting on aboriginal deaths when they are a victim and the 'mean old white man' is the perpetrator.

There is no appetite or narrative for teenage aboriginal kids raping a 5 year old aboriginal kid.
 

Mr 95%

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
22,161
Reaction score
22,880
Do you think Black Lives Matter on the planet Vulcan?

515C2432-4972-4B36-9051-A7AEA08B2656.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Squash the Berries!

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
502
Just watch Scarface or play GTA Vice City lol
No idea about GTA Vice City, but watching Scarface would certainly be cheaper and safer at the moment, but you don't get to see the hoochie mamas at night time on Ocean Drive first hand, a sight to behold.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
One thing I have to gift the left side of politics credit for, is the intelligent use of language to always appear on the 'correct' side of a political debate. True of SSM, Global warming and now BLM.

Using the term 'Black Lives Matter' instantly means anyone who argues against BLM appears to be against the idea that black people's lives matter. When the opposite is typically true. Most people argue against BLM because their a marxist organisation with political goals. People who disagree with BLM also believe that BLM is an organisation will not result in better outcomes for blacks.

But all this gets lost because as soon as you say you disagree with an organisation that is called Black Lives Matter, because on the surface people assume you are against black people, which is the furthest thing from the truth.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
One thing I have to gift the left side of politics credit for, is the intelligent use of language to always appear on the 'correct' side of a political debate. True of SSM, Global warming and now BLM.

Using the term 'Black Lives Matter' instantly means anyone who argues against BLM appears to be against the idea that black people's lives matter. When the opposite is typically true. Most people argue against BLM because their a marxist organisation with political goals. People who disagree with BLM also believe that BLM is an organisation will not result in better outcomes for blacks.

But all this gets lost because as soon as you say you disagree with an organisation that is called Black Lives Matter, because on the surface people assume you are against black people, which is the furthest thing from the truth.
I would say that the same goes for both sides of politics. It's all marketing. Using the right buzz words, the right way to shift the debate to your side.

For example, the right use "All Lives Matter". Seems simple and logical enough. All Lives should matter. Problem is that it's used to shut down the Black Lives Matter movement and it's no different to someone turning up to a cancer awareness charity with a sign that says, "What about other causes of death?". It's simple wording that twists the narrative.

It's a combination of smart marketing and strawman argument. "All Lives Matter" suggests that the BLM movement is against the lives of non-blacks. That's not true at all but it works because in those few simple words, people build that construct in their mind.

Simple terms impress the simplest part of our minds. Conspiracy theorists are the best at this with terms like, "Natural is good", "Metals in vaccines". It's simple terms that seem logical until you dig deeper. But 99% of the people won't dig. They'll take it on face value.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
Alan Jones loves using these sorts of things. Comments like, "Human beings produces 3% of the CO2 in the atmosphere"

If I knew nothing about the natural CO2 cycles and the CO2 balance then I'd say, "Holy crap, we have no effect on the climate". I do know better but I fully understand why people fall for these kind of statements. Even I fall for statements like this in other contexts 'cause if you're not an expert on absolutely everything in the Universe, then you'll eventually fall for something.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I think conservatives do a horrible job of leading the public on significant social issues / debates.

All lives matter is said because people were frustrated at being told they had to agree with Black Lives Matter or they were immediately branded racist.

All lives matter is the least racist, least controversial statement that anyone could make. By saying it you're saying that all lives matter which is exactly how society should operate.

People get offended because they mistakenly believe that black people are singled out and discriminated against in some systemic way. They also believe this in Australia in relation to aborigines, which is totally untrue.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
I think conservatives do a horrible job of leading the public on significant social issues / debates.

All lives matter is said because people were frustrated at being told they had to agree with Black Lives Matter or they were immediately branded racist.

All lives matter is the least racist, least controversial statement that anyone could make. By saying it you're saying that all lives matter which is exactly how society should operate.

People get offended because they mistakenly believe that black people are singled out and discriminated against in some systemic way. They also believe this in Australia in relation to aborigines, which is totally untrue.
You're proving my point.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
You'd need to be specific about which point and what part of saying all lives matter is considered offensive.
It's basic whataboutmeism

It was started as a form of dismissal. "Black lives matter" was responded to by saying, "No, all lives matter" in an attempt to shut down the BLM movement. This is no different to:

- Approaching a widower who's husband died and saying, "Why are you crying, everyone dies"

- Approaching a clinic for the families of suicide victims and saying, "What about the families of victims of homicide?"

- Approaching a support clinic for cancer patients and saying, "What about cardiac patients?"

Whataboutmeism

The Black Lives Matter movement starts you have 3 options:

1) Support it

2) Ignore it

3) Rally against it

All Lives Matter is very much the 3rd as it's in response to the BLM movement. If the All Lives Matter movement started before the BLM movement then there would be no issue here.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
It's basic whataboutmeism

It was started as a form of dismissal. "Black lives matter" was responded to by saying, "No, all lives matter" in an attempt to shut down the BLM movement. This is no different to:

- Approaching a widower who's husband died and saying, "Why are you crying, everyone dies"

- Approaching a clinic for the families of suicide victims and saying, "What about the families of victims of homicide?"

- Approaching a support clinic for cancer patients and saying, "What about cardiac patients?"

Whataboutmeism

The Black Lives Matter movement starts you have 3 options:

1) Support it

2) Ignore it

3) Rally against it

All Lives Matter is very much the 3rd as it's in response to the BLM movement. If the All Lives Matter movement started before the BLM movement then there would be no issue here.
The ONLY reason people started saying all lives matter is because people were not given an option to Critique BLM as an organisation/movement. Literally everyone I've heard speak/write about BLM for the past few months have all agreed that:

- Floyd was killed by cops and they should be jailed for it
- Discrimination against anyone on the basis of their skin colour is wrong and should not be tolerated

But they also realised BLM was not an honest organisation. BLM was not and is not purely about black lives, it's also about tearing down the nuclear family, western democratic society and installing marxism in it's place.

If BLM was purely about civil rights for blacks and ensuring freedom and equality for all - then literally 99.9% of the world would support it.

But many people are aware of the language tricks being played by calling the organisation BLM.

People were sick of people told they weren't allowed to have an opinion and that any opinion they have (unless it blindly supports BLM) is racist.

So people came up with All lives matter which is the best possible ideal for any society to have.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I should add that just because people don't support the Black Lives Matter organisation - DOES NOT mean they don't support the ideal of equality and fairness for all, including people with black skin (or any colour skin for that matter).

The under handed tricks and sneaky tactics of BLM means that people like me (who openly declare their stance against discrimination and racism) are actually called racist because I and many others simply state we don't agree with what the BLM organisation stands for and does.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
The ONLY reason people started saying all lives matter is because people were not given an option to Critique BLM as an organisation/movement. Literally everyone I've heard speak/write about BLM for the past few months have all agreed that:

- Floyd was killed by cops and they should be jailed for it
- Discrimination against anyone on the basis of their skin colour is wrong and should not be tolerated

But they also realised BLM was not an honest organisation. BLM was not and is not purely about black lives, it's also about tearing down the nuclear family, western democratic society and installing marxism in it's place.

If BLM was purely about civil rights for blacks and ensuring freedom and equality for all - then literally 99.9% of the world would support it.

But many people are aware of the language tricks being played by calling the organisation BLM.

People were sick of people told they weren't allowed to have an opinion and that any opinion they have (unless it blindly supports BLM) is racist.

So people came up with All lives matter which is the best possible ideal for any society to have.
Criticism is fine, but how does All Lives Matter become a valid criticism if it's dishonest.

If you're not happy with aspects of the movement then criticise that. Using ALM is not being critical of the movement. It's being completely dismissive.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Criticism is fine, but how does All Lives Matter become a valid criticism if it's dishonest.

If you're not happy with aspects of the movement then criticise that. Using ALM is not being critical of the movement. It's being completely dismissive.
How can all lives matter be dismissive when All lives matter literally means that people are saying that ALL LIVES (including black, asian, hispanic etc) matter.

It's saying that no race or skin colour is higher than another - everyone should be treated equally.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Can you see how confusing just having this debate is? It's confusing because of the sneaky tactic of calling the organisation BLM.

There is:

- BLM the organisation (what they claim to be in the media)
- BLM the organisation (what they state they are on their website)
- BLM in terms of what they've proven through actions they are over the past few months (violent, anarchist and racist / black supremacists).
- BLM in terms of what some people truly believe about the organisation (that it's just about equality)
- BLM as a theoretical concept

So when people say BLM within a debate - which BLM are they referring to?
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
How can all lives matter be dismissive when All lives matter literally means that people are saying that ALL LIVES (including black, asian, hispanic etc) matter.

It's saying that no race or skin colour is higher than another - everyone should be treated equally.
Context and timing
 

The DoggFather

OG DF
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
106,385
Reaction score
117,485
I'm gonna stir the pot as I'm bored waiting for my doctor lol

I would love to know what BLM think of abortion.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I'm gonna stir the pot as I'm bored waiting for my doctor lol

I would love to know what BLM think of abortion.
I'd love to know what BLM think of the rates of crimes committed by black men, who typically grow up in fatherless households.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,411
Can you see how confusing just having this debate is? It's confusing because of the sneaky tactic of calling the organisation BLM.

There is:

- BLM the organisation (what they claim to be in the media)
- BLM the organisation (what they state they are on their website)
- BLM in terms of what they've proven through actions they are over the past few months (violent, anarchist and racist / black supremacists).
- BLM in terms of what some people truly believe about the organisation (that it's just about equality)
- BLM as a theoretical concept

So when people say BLM within a debate - which BLM are they referring to?
You forgot, "the BLM portrayed by right wing groups"

Which is pretty much what you posted above, "violent anarchist and racist black supremacist"

There's so many myths about the movement and the fact that you spread these myths makes me believe that you either:

1) haven't actually looked very deep into the movement

Or

2) prefer to spread misinformation over truth

https://guap.co.uk/blog/2020/06/23/the-2020-black-lives-matter/

https://www.boomlive.in/world/did-b...protesters-a-fact-check-8542?infinitescroll=1

https://richmondpledge.org/wp-conte...ons-About-the-Black-Lives-Matter-Movement.pdf

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a32729926/george-floyd-protest-fake-rumors-debunked/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science...-4chan-shaved-head-woman-photographs/12363952

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/black-lives-matter-backlash-fake-culture-war

It's funny that you are often so critical of the media and the fake news, but you constantly spread fake news and myth.
 
Top