3 ms·

I stand in support of BLM, as in its core tenet, but I don't support that violence. In fact I think much of the violence associated with these protests are the

I stand in support of BLM, as in its core tenet, but I don't support that violence. In fact I think much of the violence associated with these protests are the work of agents provocateur working to delegitimize the movement. And it seems to be highly effective. A sampling of such here: https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/08/protests-provocateurs-infiltrators-are-disrupting-blm-protests/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/08/protests-provocateur... This isn't to say that some "real" protesters might not get caught up in the melee once it starts, but it's clear that outside agitators are actively working to destroy it.

pydry 5y ago
It's interesting the number of people who state that they generically "don't support violence" as if there were no meaningful distinction between violence against a person and violence against a window. Is it that you see an attack on a person as equivalent to an attack on a window? Or if not, why blur the distinction? I think that the peaceful anti-Iraq war protests of 2002 serves as a poignant example of what happens when you have a large and entirely peaceful protest. No windows got smashed in London. Only in Baghdad. I actually dont think I can think of a protest that was that large and failed so utterly in what it set out to do.
- pstuart 5y ago
  I'm not blurring anything. I'm stating that some of the violence associated with BLM is coming from people actively trying to discredit the movement. My gut tells me that it's a significant amount. What I find more interesting is that people who make a point about the violence categorically seem to to ignore this aspect of the matter. Are you willing to consider that this is happening, and if so, that perhaps that should bother you more?
  - pydry 5y ago
    No, I know some of it is police instigators but i dont think it's done to "discredit" the movement but to rile up and then entrap the peaceful protestors who can then be detained and prosecuted. It bothers me but I consider it a separate issue.
    - pstuart 5y ago
      It's absolutely about discrediting it -- look at how effective it is, it worked on you. Your words indicate that as far as you're concerned, BLM == violence and destruction, period. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/not-accident-false-thug-narratives-have-long-been-used-discredit-n1240509 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/not-accident-false-thug...
      - pydry 5y ago
        >Your words indicate that as far as you're concerned, BLM == violence It's pretty amazing that on this thread I have more people responding as if I said something completely divergent to what I said than responding to what I actually said. It's a bit sad, kind of like being on cable news.
        pstuart 5y ago
        If I misread, I apologize and welcome correction. You misread me too, so it happens to all of us. As far as the quoted text, perhaps I'm painting with a wide brush but I see a pattern here of framing BLM solely in terms of violence associated with it. Being that much of this is manufactured by interlopers I would hope that you would recognize how concerning that is.
        pstuart 5y ago
        Ah, went back to your parent comment and I apologize for my missing your original comment. In my defense, my point still stands and it's a knee-jerk response to many here who equate BLM with violence, period. The detractors have done an excellent job in smearing the movement. As to property damage, I recognize that there are understandable situations where that can occur but the real value is in the possibility of shit getting out of control vs mayhem on tap. Public protest is an important civic action and those that work to undermine it should not be tolerated.

pydry 5y ago

It's interesting the number of people who state that they generically "don't support violence" as if there were no meaningful distinction between violence against a person and violence against a window. Is it that you see an attack on a person as equivalent to an attack on a window? Or if not, why blur the distinction? I think that the peaceful anti-Iraq war protests of 2002 serves as a poignant example of what happens when you have a large and entirely peaceful protest. No windows got smashed in London. Only in Baghdad. I actually dont think I can think of a protest that was that large and failed so utterly in what it set out to do.

pstuart 5y ago
I'm not blurring anything. I'm stating that some of the violence associated with BLM is coming from people actively trying to discredit the movement. My gut tells me that it's a significant amount. What I find more interesting is that people who make a point about the violence categorically seem to to ignore this aspect of the matter. Are you willing to consider that this is happening, and if so, that perhaps that should bother you more?
- pydry 5y ago
  No, I know some of it is police instigators but i dont think it's done to "discredit" the movement but to rile up and then entrap the peaceful protestors who can then be detained and prosecuted. It bothers me but I consider it a separate issue.
  - pstuart 5y ago
    It's absolutely about discrediting it -- look at how effective it is, it worked on you. Your words indicate that as far as you're concerned, BLM == violence and destruction, period. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/not-accident-false-thug-narratives-have-long-been-used-discredit-n1240509 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/not-accident-false-thug...
    - pydry 5y ago
      >Your words indicate that as far as you're concerned, BLM == violence It's pretty amazing that on this thread I have more people responding as if I said something completely divergent to what I said than responding to what I actually said. It's a bit sad, kind of like being on cable news.
      - pstuart 5y ago
        If I misread, I apologize and welcome correction. You misread me too, so it happens to all of us. As far as the quoted text, perhaps I'm painting with a wide brush but I see a pattern here of framing BLM solely in terms of violence associated with it. Being that much of this is manufactured by interlopers I would hope that you would recognize how concerning that is.
      - pstuart 5y ago
        Ah, went back to your parent comment and I apologize for my missing your original comment. In my defense, my point still stands and it's a knee-jerk response to many here who equate BLM with violence, period. The detractors have done an excellent job in smearing the movement. As to property damage, I recognize that there are understandable situations where that can occur but the real value is in the possibility of shit getting out of control vs mayhem on tap. Public protest is an important civic action and those that work to undermine it should not be tolerated.