3 ms·

The problem is when the general population assumes that only the far right uses racist dogwhistles. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/25/abolish-w

The problem is when the general population assumes that only the far right uses racist dogwhistles. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/25/abolish-whiteness-academic-calls-for-cambridge-support https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/25/abolish-wh... > She tweeted on Tuesday: “White lives don’t matter. As white lives” and “Abolish whiteness”, I'm sorry but no amount of "academic context" makes these sentences any less racist. > It's a bit like turning up to a 9/11 memorial and saying "all plane crashes matter". Or somebody responding to a bug report by closing it WONTFIX with "all bugs matter". No it isn't, your argument is fallacious, no organization came with a "9/11 plane crash matters" slogan at first place. "black lives matter" is a bad slogan because it both doesn't mean what it says and is divisive by nature. "black lives matter" is black people telling white people that "black lives matter too". It's incredibly patronizing. The great majority of white people do understand that black lives do matter, as much as white lives and that police brutality does affect all races. If you design a slogan in such a way that it is divisive by nature, then disallow anybody else from fighting for their own cause or even broader causes, then you are not seeking a solution involving everybody, but just more racial strife, as you are claiming the exclusivity on victimhood. Nobody can come here telling me that no white people has ever been beaten or killed by the police abusing their power.

pjc50 6y ago
> The great majority of white people do understand that black lives do matter, as much as white lives and that police brutality does affect all races. If that were true, why has it been happening for so many decades? > If you design a slogan in such a way that it is divisive by nature Fairly sure MLK had something to say about this, and that it was impossible to "not be divisive" when talking about race.
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  > If that were true, why has it been happening for so many decades? You mean white people also getting killed by the police? Good question. > Fairly sure MLK had something to say about this, and that it was impossible to "not be divisive" when talking about race. The civil right act didn't grant special rights to minorities, it just made both segregation and racial discrimination illegal. This is a non divisive way to solve race issues. Divisive slogans claiming the monopoly on victimhood solve nothing.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    > You mean white people also getting killed by the police? Good question. Where was the campaign against white people getting killed by the police (or vigilantes! the original campaign was in re Trayvon Martin, who was killed by George Zimmerman) before 2013, or indeed in the present day?
    - throw_m239339 6y ago
      > Where was the campaign against white people getting killed by the police (or vigilantes! the original campaign was in re Trayvon Martin, who was killed by George Zimmerman) before 2013, or indeed in the present day? Where was the campaign against sex abuse in Hollywood before metoo as well? Now imagine women in metoo telling men to shut up about sex assault because metoo is only for female victims? This is the difference between a unifying movement and a divisive one. Especially when the latter is making a loud point about silencing anybody that attempts at broader reach. "Respect all lives", "End police brutality" doesn't make the case for black lives weaker at first place.
      - pjc50 6y ago
        > Now imagine women in metoo telling men to shut up about sex assault because metoo is only for female victims? This is a very bad example, as there's always a "what about male victims of sexual assault" faction that only appears when a women makes an allegation and doesn't actually do anything for male victims of sexual assault. > "Respect all lives", "End police brutality" doesn't make the case for black lives weaker at first place. Those are fine. It's the specific confrontational wording: a group of people saying "we matter" confronted with "no, you're not special, stop saying the word Black, it makes us uncomfortable".
        throw_m239339 6y ago
        > Those are fine. It's the specific confrontational wording: a group of people saying "we matter" confronted with "no, you're not special, stop saying the word Black, it makes us uncomfortable". but "all lives matter" isn't fine? as for the rest of your sentence, that's not what is happening. What is happening is people specifically telling others that "white people lives don't matter, as white lives" as quoted from the article I linked, which you did not address. > This is a very bad example, as there's always a "what about male victims of sexual assault" faction that only appears when a women makes an allegation and doesn't actually do anything for male victims of sexual assault. No, this is a perfect example as to how to come with a slogan that pushes unity instead of strife, when a phenomenon concerns everybody.

pjc50 6y ago

> The great majority of white people do understand that black lives do matter, as much as white lives and that police brutality does affect all races. If that were true, why has it been happening for so many decades? > If you design a slogan in such a way that it is divisive by nature Fairly sure MLK had something to say about this, and that it was impossible to "not be divisive" when talking about race.

throw_m239339 6y ago
> If that were true, why has it been happening for so many decades? You mean white people also getting killed by the police? Good question. > Fairly sure MLK had something to say about this, and that it was impossible to "not be divisive" when talking about race. The civil right act didn't grant special rights to minorities, it just made both segregation and racial discrimination illegal. This is a non divisive way to solve race issues. Divisive slogans claiming the monopoly on victimhood solve nothing.
- pjc50 6y ago
  > You mean white people also getting killed by the police? Good question. Where was the campaign against white people getting killed by the police (or vigilantes! the original campaign was in re Trayvon Martin, who was killed by George Zimmerman) before 2013, or indeed in the present day?
  - throw_m239339 6y ago
    > Where was the campaign against white people getting killed by the police (or vigilantes! the original campaign was in re Trayvon Martin, who was killed by George Zimmerman) before 2013, or indeed in the present day? Where was the campaign against sex abuse in Hollywood before metoo as well? Now imagine women in metoo telling men to shut up about sex assault because metoo is only for female victims? This is the difference between a unifying movement and a divisive one. Especially when the latter is making a loud point about silencing anybody that attempts at broader reach. "Respect all lives", "End police brutality" doesn't make the case for black lives weaker at first place.
    - pjc50 6y ago
      > Now imagine women in metoo telling men to shut up about sex assault because metoo is only for female victims? This is a very bad example, as there's always a "what about male victims of sexual assault" faction that only appears when a women makes an allegation and doesn't actually do anything for male victims of sexual assault. > "Respect all lives", "End police brutality" doesn't make the case for black lives weaker at first place. Those are fine. It's the specific confrontational wording: a group of people saying "we matter" confronted with "no, you're not special, stop saying the word Black, it makes us uncomfortable".
      - throw_m239339 6y ago
        > Those are fine. It's the specific confrontational wording: a group of people saying "we matter" confronted with "no, you're not special, stop saying the word Black, it makes us uncomfortable". but "all lives matter" isn't fine? as for the rest of your sentence, that's not what is happening. What is happening is people specifically telling others that "white people lives don't matter, as white lives" as quoted from the article I linked, which you did not address. > This is a very bad example, as there's always a "what about male victims of sexual assault" faction that only appears when a women makes an allegation and doesn't actually do anything for male victims of sexual assault. No, this is a perfect example as to how to come with a slogan that pushes unity instead of strife, when a phenomenon concerns everybody.