3 ms·

"All Lives Matter" redirects attention away from the specific thing "Black Lives Matter" was meant to draw attention to, which is that, if you are black specifi

"All Lives Matter" redirects attention away from the specific thing "Black Lives Matter" was meant to draw attention to, which is that, if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher. There are other racial issues surfaced by black lives matter, as a slogan, eg, having to do with health care, real estate, etc. No one things that all lives don't matter, but the statement "black lives matter" is used to highlight specific social problems in the US. It would be like if you cut your finger and asked for a bandaid for your finger, and someone kept saying, "But ALL your fingers are important."

SV_BubbleTime 9mo ago
> if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher. Again, not an expert. But, are we talking per police interaction, or per capita, or of all police homicides? Pretty sure when I saw, far more unarmed white people were killed than unarmed black people per year, which per capita makes sense, right? But, isn’t total police interactions more inportant?
- nathan_compton 9mo ago
  Its very hard to get a sense for this. There are a few papers which indicate that on a per interaction basis, black and latino people are a few percent more likely to end up dead than white people, but that, again, doesn't necessarily mean that police are more disposed to escalate with these two groups. "Criminality" might be higher among some groups than others, and so the context of interactions with police might be different, but, on the other hand, criminality is to some degree socially constructed and is also correlated with economic hardship, which is racialized in the US (and most other places). I'm not really interested in defending some sort of per se percentage of unjust police killings, anyway. I think there is ample enough evidence that racism is still a pretty big issue in the US that the slogan "black lives matter" is at worst harmless and at best communicates something important.
  - refulgentis 9mo ago
    If he posts back, don’t bother, he spent 2 thrilling days pretending the Grok image scandal was a couple dudes putting people in bikinis for a couple days. Swear to god. Then went full aggro political even when it was obvious I wasn’t blaming X.
    - SV_BubbleTime 9mo ago
      I like that you searched my post history because you couldn’t defend saying grok is in its “post-pedo” era. Hilarious. You can admit anytime you were talking out your ass, have no sources, and are mad that someone called you out on irrational Muks-hate.

SV_BubbleTime 9mo ago

> if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher. Again, not an expert. But, are we talking per police interaction, or per capita, or of all police homicides? Pretty sure when I saw, far more unarmed white people were killed than unarmed black people per year, which per capita makes sense, right? But, isn’t total police interactions more inportant?

nathan_compton 9mo ago
Its very hard to get a sense for this. There are a few papers which indicate that on a per interaction basis, black and latino people are a few percent more likely to end up dead than white people, but that, again, doesn't necessarily mean that police are more disposed to escalate with these two groups. "Criminality" might be higher among some groups than others, and so the context of interactions with police might be different, but, on the other hand, criminality is to some degree socially constructed and is also correlated with economic hardship, which is racialized in the US (and most other places). I'm not really interested in defending some sort of per se percentage of unjust police killings, anyway. I think there is ample enough evidence that racism is still a pretty big issue in the US that the slogan "black lives matter" is at worst harmless and at best communicates something important.
- refulgentis 9mo ago
  If he posts back, don’t bother, he spent 2 thrilling days pretending the Grok image scandal was a couple dudes putting people in bikinis for a couple days. Swear to god. Then went full aggro political even when it was obvious I wasn’t blaming X.
  - SV_BubbleTime 9mo ago
    I like that you searched my post history because you couldn’t defend saying grok is in its “post-pedo” era. Hilarious. You can admit anytime you were talking out your ass, have no sources, and are mad that someone called you out on irrational Muks-hate.