The #shutitdown movement (or #icantbreathe, or whatever it’s going by today) seems to be off to a promising start. I remarked in an earlier post that this movement is unique in our time because of the diverse groups of people it has brought together, in some cases people who were vehemently opposed to one another prior to the Eric Garner case non-indictment. It seemed almost too good to be true – Americans of all political leanings and ethnicities finally uniting together against the corruption that has been the true enemy all along. Have no fear, we’ll be back to our normal in-fighting and disorganized, counter-productive divisions in a jiffy thanks to a growing sub-movement, stoked by people like this, and he/she is not alone. This post has already gone viral with a huge number of supporters.
So, if you’re actually here for making Black Lives Matter, put down your “I can’t breathe” signs (because you can, and that’s the point) and pick up one that declares Black Lives Matter (because right now they don’t, and that’s the point). Get off the ground and stand in solidarity as Black people “die-in” (because it’s not white bodies lying dead on our nation’s streets, and that’s the point). Hand over the bullhorn to a Black person (because your voice doesn’t need a bullhorn to be heard, and that’s the point).
And please, stop saying #AllLivesMatter…until they actually do.
First, I’d just like say to Mr./Ms. Tam… get the fuck out of here with this bullshit.
Second, let me nitpick your lack of reading comprehension/logic. You want people to stop saying “all lives matter” because, currently, in your opinion, black lives don’t matter. Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure “ALL” includes black people. Even if it doesn’t… you want everyone to stop saying “all lives matter” because black lives don’t matter. Yet you want them to replace this slogan with… “black lives matter”? Isn’t that the very antithesis of logic? If you don’t want the original slogan to be used until black lives matter, then why the hell would it make sense to say “black lives matter” if black lives don’t matter? This is 2nd grade logic and reading comprehension. Clearly you don’t understand that the slogan, “all lives matter” doesn’t mean “all lives currently matter and there’s no issues here, carry on,” but actually means “all lives should matter and we are fighting for a system in which all lives will matter.” It is a message of unity, showing that we ALL stand together against injustice because ALL lives matter. Anyone that doesn’t understand that has no business writing posts telling people how to protest. Anyway, that’s just a jab at some stupidity. On to the real issues…
Police brutality is not a race issue. Police not being held accountable is not a race issue. Common people not being represented in the political process and justice system is not a race issue. Turning this movement into a race issue and pushing away non-black people is the fastest way to kill it. Want to play the race game? Okay, we can play the race game. The number of white people killed by police over the last decade is double the number of black people killed. Sure, you can adjust per capita, but that isn’t changing the absolute number of people that are no longer alive and how many of those people are white. So there is zero factual basis for this being a black only movement. Those white people standing next to you that you don’t seem to welcome?
As I walked through the streets of Berkeley tonight listening to the overwhelmingly white crowd chant things like “Whose streets? Our streets!” and “This is what democracy looks like!” I felt uncomfortable. I passed white people holding signs that said “I can’t breathe” and I felt uncomfortable. Then, when we were instructed to sit down in the middle of the main street that runs through downtown Berkeley and were made to listen to a white person on a bullhorn declare “All lives matter!” I felt invisible. Ignored. Forgotten.
Those people who are making you feel uncomfortable and invisible? They’re getting tear gassed too. They’re getting beaten too. They’re getting arrested too. They care enough about the cause to endure all that right beside you. If your biggest concern is you not getting enough spotlight, then I think you need to go home and think about your priorities.
America has serious issues with a developing (or already existent) police state, police brutality, and police immunity from the law. These are not race issues. They are manifestations of systemic corruption and an out of control police force that no longer serves the interests of the common folk. Making this movement a race issue narrows the scope of the movement. Suddenly it’s no longer about all the things I just listed; it’s solely about police discrimination against blacks. In reality, police discrimination is merely one aspect of much larger problems with the American law enforcement system. Narrow the movement down and the solutions that come from the movement will be treatment of a symptom rather than cures for the real systemic disease. Fight your allies for the spotlight and I hope you feel good about perpetuating the divide and conquer techniques that kept the diverse number of people united by this movement apart previously.
The Whiteboard Pig 
Reblogged this on Nevada State Personnel Watch.
LikeLike
for the most part I like your work… you’re a little brusque when talking about young foreign girls like ignorant first graders due to the way they write english and interpret the world, and you miss some of the nuances that piss people off on a micro-aggression level due in part to your male privilege but as you are pretty self aware, I’m suspending my doubts and I do understand where our more important common ground can and should be found.
“I will try not to use too many big flowery words or disclaimers so as not to displease you…” she said sarcastically.
So that all being said… you missed the point of “black lives matter”. And why to step apart before rejoining the collective. And why minority voices matter in this regard is not to suggest no one else does. I’m not going to “argue” my points. But I will say there is an enormous gap in your comprehension. I do see where the black lives matter campaign is failing to reach, but it’s not “bullshit”.
LikeLike
I certainly never referred to her as ignorant. Kids have a way of speaking with extreme honesty and bluntness, while adults, especially in writing, have a tendancy to create a forest when a tree would have done just fine. Her writing reminded me of the way I’ve heard of children speaking when my sister (who is a grade school teacher) recounts stories of her students. It was anything but an insult.
Trust me, I do understand the point of “black lives matter.” I simply disagree with it. As I’ve mentioned in other comment replies, I feel it undermines the larger issues at hand and will, in time, result in “solutions” that ultimately benefit no one, the minority communities included.
LikeLike
I realize you were attempting a compliment of the young blogger. You didn’t speak of it as innocence and used the word ignorance I thought. Maybe I misread that. I’ve been a preschool teacher as well as worked with grade school kids thru high school age groups too, and you don’t have to be condescending to note their candor. And the foreigners with the beginning grasp of language should not be compared to first graders, even if they are using language simply and at that level… because bi-lingual people are smarter. Like how some english speaking people speak louder as if the non english speaking person is deaf… it’s not necessary. But I know you didn’t mean anything but compliments… they don’t sound like real compliments tho. Like why break it all down to build her up? Why not just excerpt what it is you liked without explaining the “childlike” qualities?
In terms of this post about black lives matter not working for the whole, In the way the current hierarchy exists, of course you’re going to say it benefits no one. Voices which are constantly invalidated are use to your view. Marginalized voices are use to having to consider all others first and come as second class. That’s the problem. The solution would be better listeners that validate those feelings and then bridges begin and openings happen because we validate their experiences. It is not an invalidation of the whole. It is a step towards joining the whole of which black lives are a part. The polarized debate refuses to recognize the nuances and that’s the problem.
Anyhow, thanks for the dialogue. I do like reading your work. I like the strength of your convictions even when I don’t agree with you.
LikeLike
I thought you might be interested in this link to vox populi… it has different points of view on related topics and the link below has to do with the cop union in NYC and the mayors questioning of the Garner case…
It’s not terribly lengthy, but maybe it has some merit for your consideration… it’s not arguing with you or the iamfreemantoo who made a comment to me, so I offer it as info and a perspective only. One more nuance. No divides per se.
http://wp.me/p4xqzG-14r
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not on board with most of his perspective, but he makes an important point at the end. This mentality of “if you don’t worship us then you’re against us” is common in America. It’s primary use is to control discussion about the military. It’s used to suppress disagreement with US foreign policy, because if you don’t agree that the troops are out there defending our freedom then you must hate the troops – very few want to risk that label nearly literally a death sentence in this country. Now that line of public discourse control has been applied to the police with similar results. The general public is now afraid to condemn police violence lest they labeled as anti-police and unappreciative of this supposed jesus-like sacrifice the police make for us each day (never mind the inaccuracy of that view).
The bottom line is this stuff all comes down to control of public discourse. Noam Chomsky had a discussion on how the public is controlled in a democracy through the manipulation of discourse on issues. The powers that be can’t make people do their will directly as in a dictatorship, but if you can guide the public’s discussion on national issues you can get them to control each other. We see this played out as vox populi mentioned with how the pro-police public is now eagerly labeling everyone that doesn’t worship the police as an ungrateful police hater. Likewise, in my opinion, this drive to make broader issues into race issues serves the same purpose. I can no longer talk about the larger issues of police brutality and police militarization because I will be labeled (and have been by some) a racist. That effectively shuts down the conversation on those bigger issues, which shuts down the movement to reform them. And so the controlling of public discourse controls public action.
I actually have a post in my drafts that spoke to these ideas in much greater detail. I was debating its relevance because I felt like we had passed that point of discussion and moved to more pressing issues after the looking if the nypd officers. Maybe I’ll go back and finish writing it though, then you might better understand my stance.
I apologize in advance for typos and illogical writing. This was all done in my phone and it’s too much of a hassle to bother editing.
LikeLike
No edit necessary. You did a fine job explaining actually, but I’d still be interested in the article you have mentioned the possibility of finishing.
I wasn’t completely on board with the vox post I linked you to either, but I found it somewhat interesting and was curious about your response so thanks for taking the time.
I like Chomsky very much. I found the Chomsky Trilogy worth rereading not too long ago and so I appreciate you referring to him.
I’m not sure anyone has moved past anything to more pressing issues. I think that would be preferable, but that we aren’t there yet. And I think the discourses resurface not just with every generation but as we need to expand on them so we understand our different languages or understandings of the same events and or material about the events. I’m not calling you a racist… btw.
I will reflect further on your original article and what you’ve commented on here because after your remarks here, I think I’m agreeing with you on a basic level, but that I’m understanding why the black lives matters differentiation has to happen anyhow… and also that you should go ahead and talk at the risk of being labeled racist. Because really who cares if we get called racist? Does that really mean the whole thing gets “shut down”? If we are trying to get anywhere with race relations don’t we have to risk being called ignorant too? Isn’t it important how we sound to others regardless of our intention?
I’m not worried about being called racist. I want to know what I do that is. Black lives matter was evidently started by black lesbians… they’d like credit because they are the most disenfranchised group besides transgendered people… and then it got taken on by the larger black movement with so many recent events and then All lives got promoted and each marginalized group feels a sense of urgency. So I see easily where it is all undermining itself, being used against each other, as well as the importance of the original causes. I am considering the whole picture…
Perhaps more later. I think I’ve taken up enough of your time for now! Thanks again for the discussion.
LikeLike
All you people of color and ethnicity (I’ll now add gender) (to which my Mexican heritage make me a part of) what do you want? Do you want whites to be killed and harmed more? Or do you want blacks and minorities killed and beaten less and in proportion to that of whites? Or do you want this legalized violence and legalized murder and manslaughter to stop for everyone? Which is it?
It’s very interesting how Gardner’s father and daughter say it’s not about race but about corruption, but the ugly divisive racism keeps sticking its head out. Funny how in watching a black oriented program discussing racism (as you do), the host of the program later makes a statement that those blacks who are succeeding do not give back to their own community once they’ve achieved economic freedom (the general rule and not the exceptions) so as comment went. It’s a very simple concept that seems to escape you, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Power no matter how it is gained is to be kept at all possible costs. Racism today where used in content and context of police brutality keeps the present power structure of abuse in tact. Effectively you are begging for privileges from the abusers. It’s like brown chickens holding up signs to carnivorous wolves, “Brown chicken lives matter too.” Effectively saying, “Treat us brown chickens more fairly by either eating more white chickens or eating less brown chickens.” On top of that the chickens hired the wolves to guard the hen house. Yea that makes sense. That’s your argument.
Let’s further talk about stupid and lack of comprehension. Where the population is near about 70% black how is the government in Ferguson run by a 30% minorities of whites? Whose fault is that? Darren Wilson was fired along with everyone from his former Jennings police job, because the elected officials of Jennings said that Darren and the rest of the officers didn’t know how to serve the community of mostly black people.
Now did the 30% in Ferguson rig the elections to white city leaders? Or did the 70% not even participate in electing a more diverse city council? Who’s to blame for that? I guess it’s still not about racism. It does seem to be about stupid though. I’m not much about the majority voting in what favors the majority at the expense of the minority creating inequality, however if I’m part of 70% (or a majority as it appears must have been the case in Jennings), no one will abuse me politically or physically for very long where my vote is counted.
The fact that “Black lives matter” and “All lives matter” are the topics is a win for those keeping the fight away from corruption and real power. Katherine I would suggest that you are very inured to a corrupt system where you prefer pruning weeds and dandelions instead of pulling them out by the roots. Yea it’s pure “bullshit”.
Katherine, please ignore those union police leaders and state courts justifying their corruption and murder; ignore those police groups with shirts saying “I can breath (too bad you can’t when my jack boot is on your neck)” or “Obey and you can breath (I’m not sure about this one, but the inference is there)”. Of course don’t focus on the “obey or else” implications upon all whether lawful or not (oh it will be made legal), just make sure that whites have to “obey” as much as anyone under a thumb does. Katherine you do sound like someone with all the pieces to the puzzle but you were born without thumbs.
LikeLike
Oh you big know it all ifreemantoo…
Yeah… yeah “divide and conquer and you got no thumbs monkey girl.” That the best you got?
WOW… you really know how to make friends and influence people. Good job!
LikeLike
“Oh you big know it all…you really know how to make friends and influence people.” Gee Katherine, I was speaking from your point of view as a condescending pompous know it all uninterested in how to make friends and influence people. Looks like I nailed it.
In one sense, if it seems I put it all on you, well I’m a bit frustrated with the games people are pulled into and keep playing and accept as normal. The “argument” and “apologetics” about and surrounding “racism” completely distract and detract from the looming elephant in the room and that being the corruption of state; the police state or/and the state of police so inept and poorly trained causing much harm and death; and all of this being accepted as a normal part of life by so many too comfortable and highly educated.
Whiteboardpig made the very good point that it appeared for a moment (particularly with Eric Gardner) that the focus and root would shift to the mischief of state and police, but as noted instead the focus and root is side tracked to being mostly about racism to be corrected again by the state the created the mischief in the first place. Perhaps being a highly educated fool the tall walls that surround the mind seem pretty and justify the abusers being the remedy for their abuse. I’m just not that highly educated to have that convenience of such walls and blinders.
LikeLike
I have zero interest in speaking with you. You do not know how to approach me for my receptivity. That’s your fault not mine. I realize you’d like to convince me of something about myself, but you can not. You haven’t taken the right steps. So although you are attracted to me and would like to fight, I’m not going to read your remarks. Find some one else to bother.
I’m discussing things with the author just fine and he doesn’t offend me. I don’t need your help i understand ing the issues at all. Good bye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I typed that fast… so there are typos… But I don’t need your help understanding the issues. And you don’t need to be hostile towards me just because you are a know it all. Ok bye now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So…this is for you ifreemantoo and Whiteboardpig author both, if either of you feel like listening and watching…
here is a link to a lecture by bell hooks and Arthur Jafa that explains why black lives matter in the manner I am intending. There are many pieces to the puzzle… so that should interest your opposable thumbs, ifreemantoo.
enjoy.
LikeLike
Regarding the link supplied by you Katherine where these words subhead the article. “To stop future assassinations of police, we must toughen gun laws & end police brutality against minorities.”
This article purely minimizes the root problem and does not address just ending police brutality; period and not just ending it for minorities. This is just more of the same for as long as governments have been around where they abuse power and the people they are supposed to serve. Here it is offered to make for stricter “gun control” of people in order to protect the storm troopers that get away too often with legalized murder. Classic blame shifting and distraction. Don’t admit the error or mischief by blaming the one harmed, refocus an agenda for greater control of the people (gun control) and justify the injustice.
Andrew Napolitano is someone that addresses the root problem as a former judge. Without a lot of “legal ease” he squarely addresses the root problem and symptoms in his book “Constitutional Chaos” starting with the introduction titled “Breaking the Law” pg. ix:
“Because it breaks the law, the government is not your friend…after witnessing first-hand how the criminal justice system works to subvert and shred the Constitution. You think you have rights that are guaranteed? Well think again.
Because the government breaks the law and denies it, the government is not your friend.”
And pg. 181. “The government is simply stretching and twisting federal law and the Constitution in whatever way it sees fit for whatever contemporary need it may have.”
Contents of Part 1: “Rights and Liberties
1. Breaking the law to enforce it
2. Attacking the Innocent
3. Creating Crime
4. Grabbing Guns, Endangering Citizens
5. Filching Property
6. Gagging Free Speech
7. Bribing Witnesses, Buying Convictions
8. Assaulting the People
Part 3 The Hard Test: The War on Terror”
10 The Justices Department Terror Tactics
—–
It’s simply amazing that no one really wants to address the elephant in the room “that breaks the law and denies and therefore is not your friend”. But instead they beg to be whipped and chained equally.
LikeLike
Gee Katherine thanks for the laugh. BTW I don’t measure people by the content of their misspellings or errors. I’m dyslexic and do it all the time. I do however measure the words used. I’m sorry though that you got flustered. And the timing of reading your words while listening to “Rattled” by the Travelin’ Wiburys was priceless.
Thanks for explaining with so many words your “zero interest in speaking with…” me. 😉
LikeLike
That’s odd you were still talking to me all by your lonesome here… um… I left you a video lecture to watch. You clearly do not understand me or what I’m saying. I’m was not flustered. I typed too fast and I’m not a typist. And I was impatient but flustered? Naw.
I not only met Tom Petty but he gave me a ticket to the 1995 grammy’s. He won that year for Wildflowers. But so your traveling Wilbury’s? Regards.
LikeLike
Katherine you’re still giving me smiles. “…still talking to me all by your lonesome here…” and “zero interest” begs the question, Are you talking to yourself or someone else with my handle? You know I created a catch 22 for you; damned if you do or don’t respond. It’s just worse when you further respond after saying you don’t wanna hear and then write, “still talking to me…” 😉
You remind me of the Jerry Seinfeld episode where George breaks up with his girlfriend and he seems in control except that getting back with his GF provided her with the same opportunity to break up and she used it. Well this interesting dialogue is just making me smile and helped me to lighten up on the seriousness of the issues for a moment. But it is up to you to break up with me for real. I know I’ll miss the smiles. 😉
It seems you sent out something else for my/our review, which I respectfully read and looked at. I also responded and further commented with Judge Andrew Napolitano’s view. I would say that you were either to flustered to respond or you used my retort as an excuse to ignore my response, so I’m really not interested in more of a one way street. You also said, “I don’t want to argue my points.” To me that sounds like arrogant pontification on top of calling someone “brusque” in as much you are the same as well I can be “brusque”.
Yea a lot of Tom Petty was pretty good. Disappointed though that he backed down.
LikeLike
Let’s all try to keep the personal level bickering and poking to a minimum if we can. There’s plenty of actual debate to be done on the topics at hand, no need to risk carpal tunnel doing all the extra personal quibbling.
I will have to check out the video when I get a chance.
LikeLike
I’m not reading much of your comments to me. I don’t care if you are smiling or not. You’re just doing that thing where if you laugh at someone you think you can undermine them. It’s another way of not listening. I am offering you an opportunity to learn from a dialogue between two people I care about. They think and talk like I do and if you want to be able to talk to me, which you do… then you can open to this or not. You have a chance to develop an under developed organ that Arthur Jafa will better explain to you in the lecture. I don’t care if you take this opportunity or not. I don’t care if you believe me. I don’t care if you are not convinced. I am not fighting you or trying to belittle you like you are trying to do to me.
Tom Petty is a very generous person from very humble roots. I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t insult my friends.
Your “points” came at me as insult. You questioned my thumbs inferring I am a lower life form. You are using sarcasm and laughter because you have no points to make yet. You are fearful. When you decide you can find some better manners, when you choose to speak to me how I prefer, maybe I’ll care about your “points”.
The video is good. It’s for everyone. It’s loving. And you are not. You are being hateful. Stop comparing me to people that have no relevance to me and discover why you feel the need to pick on me. Seriously. You’re making me up. You aren’t even trying.
LikeLike
Katherine more of the “Zero Interest” yet still talking to me; interesting. As the Whiteboardpig asked to tone it down, I will. I would suggest that much of your accusations to me are the way you treat people. I’m simply a reflection of it and do it better than you to you. Try reading what you write.
If you feel you have something worthy to pursue you should go after that as I have no respect for you or your point of view and your wasting too much energy with someone that you have a “zero interest” in; so then I guess I’ll have to break up with you. I’m sorry.
To Whiteboardpig as that there is not much benefit to you or your topic in my post, I would not feel offended or slighted if you deleted my comments like this one where it serves no other purpose than tort vs retort. I think your points are right on and it’s sad that so much of the exposed mischief is sidetracked by less than root issues and people like Katherine. I’m dropping out of this discussion and I have better fish to fry.
LikeLike
You’re very odd… I’m not doing anything to sidetrack the author of this blog. You are. You invaded my conversation with him. Then you proceeded to have an imaginary conversation with me when I told you not to bother me and you made comments that laughed at and insulted me to me in your comments and behind my back and you’re blaming me?
As well as you say things like we are breaking up? I’m married, okay weirdo? We aren’t an item. Your language with women is socially retarded.
I’m glad you’re dropping out. It’s about time.
LikeLike
The previous was meant for another thread. Please delete if you want.
LikeLike