Does creating a fictitious narrative to make yourself feel better than others help you sleep at night? Because if it is then before I put you on ignore I'd recommend chamomile tea. Hope you it helps mate, bye.Oh it is true. The fact you are denying it makes it even worse.
This should be the default position unless someone is making overt heinous comments. Not sure why I need to ask but thanks I guess.OK, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you really are approaching this topic from a position of good faith.
I'm not asking that at all. I already know how they can be heard.So you are asking, how can other people who face systemic oppression be heard while supporting BLM?
When I was at a protest this weekend, the crowd was incredibly diverse.
That's fine. You're arguing against a strawman here. No where did I say people shouldn't use the term "BLM". No where. Just so were clearly I'll make it overt by saying that if people want to fight oppression by only using the term "BLM" or if they only want to focus specifically on just black lives at the moment then fine. I have zero problem with that.There were Native American people with signs that said "indigenous people support BLM" and "This country was founded on stolen labor and stolen land". There were asian folks with signs that said "Asian Americans stand with BLM" and "Yellow Peril is with BLM". There where white people holding up signs saying "white silence kills". There were feminists there with signs saying "smash the patriarchy, fuck the cops, BLM". THAT is how you encourage a conversation about other forms of oppression while centering black voices in the conversation and BLM as a movement.
By saying mentioning Uyghurs means you're "deflecting and distracting from the movement" it does certainly seem like you're saying fighting oppression needs to take turns, like someone can't focus on the oppression Uyghurs and black Americans at the same time. If that's how you approach matters then fine, I wouldn't agree with that personally as I know a number of people that try and do good on a number of causes all at the same time."All Lives Matter" is BULLSHIT. It was coined as a phrase solely to combat BLM and to shut down black voices. If you are out there saying "All Lives Matter, also what about the Uighurs?" then you are deflecting and distracting from the movement, even if you don't intend to, because you are ceding to the white supremacist framing.
2 people. One of which is arguing in such a freakishly bad faith way and you. I also don't agree that your social media bubble is the only social media bubble. Ok you happen to orbit/come into contact with white racists in your bubble. My bubble mainly consists of people of colour (from the UK) themselves so the context isn't even remotely the same.People are having a negative reaction to you because you really should know by now what All Lives Matter means and how it is being used
Does creating a fictitious narrative to make yourself feel better than others help you sleep at night? Because if it is then before I put you on ignore I'd recommend chamomile tea. Hope you it helps mate, bye.
This should be the default position unless someone is making overt heinous comments. Not sure why I need to ask but thanks I guess.
I'm not asking that at all. I already know how they can be heard.
That's fine. You're arguing against a strawman here. No where did I say people shouldn't use the term "BLM". No where. Just so were clearly I'll make it overt by saying that if people want to fight oppression by only using the term "BLM" or if they only want to focus specifically on just black lives at the moment then fine. I have zero problem with that.
What I'm saying is that for some people they don't think that the oppression of black people is the only injustice going on at the moment, they don't think it should be the only focus, they don't think it should be centre stage and others being oppressed are an after thought tact on at the end. Some people have been consistently raising awareness and trying to fight various forms of injustices in Myanmar, Yemeni, Xinjiang etc.. for a while now and think they're equally as noble and worthwhile causes as black oppression in america. So for them a term like "all lives matter" encompasses all of those with putting anyone cause on the back seat. That's what they are doing. These specific people aren't saying "my safe comfortable life is worth the same as oppressed individuals" as people are trying to make out here, they're are saying all the differing oppressed lives matter equally
By saying mentioning Uyghurs means you're "deflecting and distracting from the movement" it does certainly seem like you're saying fighting oppression needs to take turns, like someone can't focus on the oppression Uyghurs and black Americans at the same time. If that's how you approach matters then fine, I wouldn't agree with that personally as I know a number of people that try and do good on a number of causes all at the same time.
I also don't agree with just letting white supremacist "own" a perfectly positive phrase.
2 people. One of which is arguing in such a freakishly bad faith way and you. I also don't agree that your social media bubble is the only social media bubble. Ok you happen to orbit/come into contact with white racists in your bubble. My bubble mainly consists of people of colour themselves so the context isn't even remotely the same.
I'm not the one using the phrase. And it's not just a single person that I know using in in positive manner, it's multiple. If you'd actually read my post sincerely before making this pointless sarcastic post you'd know that.Ok cool yo. You're the only person who is talking about Myanmar and Xinjiang when they say all lives matter. Everyone else saying it is a racist Karen. Congrats on your victory.
I'm not the one using the phrase. And it's not just a single person that I know using in in positive manner, it's multiple. If you'd actually read my post sincerely before making this pointless sarcastic post you'd know that.
OK, no one thinks the oppression of black people on America is the only oppression going on right now. Black Americans certainly don't think that. These protests have a very clear purpose and message, and are motivated by a very specific subject (police brutality against black people). I never said various forms of oppression had to 'take turns', but clearly you think that or the people who you are describing think that if they think that these protests shouldn't be focused on the particular issue that prompted them and is fueling them. You seem to be setting up this really weird strawman where every protest HAS to be about every form of injustice simultaneously, even though that's generally not how activism works. Activism works through having a clear message. I'm not saying you are against BLM, but when All Lives Matter was coined specifically as a rebuttal to BLM, then people need to be aware of what they are saying when invoking it. These protests aren't specifically about Myanmar, or the Uighurs, or Yemen, or whatever else, but all of those causes and the people they affect are welcome to unite behind a common goal of resisting oppression.Does creating a fictitious narrative to make yourself feel better than others help you sleep at night? Because if it is then before I put you on ignore I'd recommend chamomile tea. Hope you it helps mate, bye.
This should be the default position unless someone is making overt heinous comments. Not sure why I need to ask but thanks I guess.
I'm not asking that at all. I already know how they can be heard.
That's fine. You're arguing against a strawman here. No where did I say people shouldn't use the term "BLM". No where. Just so were clearly I'll make it overt by saying that if people want to fight oppression by only using the term "BLM" or if they only want to focus specifically on just black lives at the moment then fine. I have zero problem with that.
What I'm saying is that for some people they don't think that the oppression of black people is the only injustice going on at the moment, they don't think it should be the only focus, they don't think it should be centre stage and others being oppressed are an after thought tact on at the end. Some people have been consistently raising awareness and trying to fight various forms of injustices in Myanmar, Yemeni, Xinjiang etc.. for a while now and think they're equally as noble and worthwhile causes as black oppression in america. So for them a term like "all lives matter" encompasses all of those without putting any one cause on the back seat. That's what they are doing. These specific people aren't saying "my safe comfortable life is worth the same as oppressed individuals" as people are trying to make out here, they're are saying all the differing oppressed lives matter equally
By saying mentioning Uyghurs means you're "deflecting and distracting from the movement" it does certainly seem like you're saying fighting oppression needs to take turns, like someone can't focus on the oppression Uyghurs and black Americans at the same time. If that's how you approach matters then fine, I wouldn't agree with that personally as I know a number of people that try and do good on a number of causes all at the same time.
I also don't agree with just letting white supremacist "own" a perfectly positive phrase.
2 people. One of which is arguing in such a freakishly bad faith way and you. I also don't agree that your social media bubble is the only social media bubble. Ok you happen to orbit/come into contact with white racists in your bubble. My bubble mainly consists of people of colour (from the UK) themselves so the context isn't even remotely the same.
The difference between us lies in the fact you're only/predominantly basing your view on the American social media verse. I'm not. Their are a lot of social media bubbles that aren't American centric that haven't been invaded by alt-right/racist/4chan troll groups. Where not every other account has an anime avatar with maga hat.I'd sincerely like to see who these people are and try to comprehend why they would continue to use the phrase when it's obviously been coopted by racists. Hell, it originated with racists. It doesn't make sense. Usually when i see it 9/10 times they also bring in millions of dead black babies because of abortion. So I don't understand why anyone using the phrase would continue using it. If you want to campaign for global human rights it doesn't even make sense to use that phrase. Point out all the abuses you care about and campaign against them. Blanketing them all with all lives matter no one is even going to know what the fuck you are talking about if you want to help Xinjiang or Myanmar, they will assume you are attempting to subvert a good cause because that's what virtually every one who uses the phrase is doing.
I'm white, but I hate when other white people say this to me when we discuss racial issues. Makes me flip out every time. The black on black crime thing is particularly angering.White people have always used deflection in order to avoid having to have any sort of honest discussion or introspection about their own privilege. "All Lives Matter" is just the natural progression of "it's been 400 years get over it" or "What about black on black crime" or "Why do they get their own channel?".
They will all be billionaires one day, just watch!The unflinching belief that everyone in the country is in equal standing with one another and that hard work and perseverance can fix anything
Did you miss the part where I very literally said that if people want to only focus on this specific issue then that's totally fine and valid? What I also said is that some people might want make it a wider issue on the various forms of pressing oppression in the world.These protests have a very clear purpose and message, and are motivated by a very specific subject (police brutality against black people).
Not sure how it's me that thinks that when you are literally the only person that has twice now said that brining up another cause of oppression literally "distracting". Mate you said that. No one else. What else could that mean?I never said various forms of oppression had to 'take turns', but clearly you think that or the people who you are describing think that if they think that these protests shouldn't be focused on the particular issue that prompted them and is fueling them.
Nope. Only strawman here is this by you since never once did I say people "HAVE" to protest "all" forms of oppression at the same time. I even mentioned specific cases, not all cases of oppression. People are free and welcome to champion whatever singular cause they want. What I am saying is that for some people that have a particular cause they're interested prior to this and then they see the oppression in America and maybe various other players it might flip a switch in their head that hey a lot of different people are being oppressed all of over the world not just these specific people I've be championing, I want to be inclusive a for a moment champion all oppressed people. Don't think there's anything at all wrong with that.You seem to be setting up this really weird strawman where every protest HAS to be about every form of injustice simultaneously, even though that's generally not how activism works.
As I pointed to another user, for some people their social media bubble is not going to consist of a significant amount of people that are rebutting BLM. They see it as a general positive term and use it as such. We differ on allowing racist to own the term, I fully understand where you're coming from but where I'm coming from is I don't believe in allowing coordinated racist troll groups own whatever they put their minds to.I'm not saying you are against BLM, but when All Lives Matter was coined specifically as a rebuttal to BLM, then people need to be aware of what they are saying when invoking it.
We're are in agreement on this then. I've never said any different.These protests aren't specifically about Myanmar, or the Uighurs, or Yemen, or whatever else, but all of those causes and the people they affect are welcome to unite behind a common goal of resisting oppression.
They wouldn't angry. When did I say they would be angry? I literally said they he exact opposite. Just as we are getting somewhere you veer into another strawman which I said the exact opposite ofWhy would someone who has faced another form of oppression be angry that this form of oppression, which has been an issue for decades and has been reignited because of recent events, be upset that it's being protested against?
You're using whataboutism incorrectly in this case. What I am saying is that the people using all lives matter are not trying to discredit the fight against black oppression, they just adding to it.When the Dakota Access Pipeline was being protested, black activists were there to help native American people assert their rights to their land. They weren't engaging in whataboutism on Twitter.
Aren't those images from the ferguson protests?
Still relevant today as far as the idiocy that comes from the alllivesmatter brigade is concerned
Then what's the issue, exactly? Anyone can talk about any type of oppression they want to, no one is stopping them. They probably shouldn't use the All Lives Matter framing though, since that was created specifically to downplay BLM as a movement. Maybe people in other countries are unaware of that, but if they are gonna jump into this conversation they can learn.Did you miss the part where I very literally said that if people want to only focus on this specific issue then that's totally fine and valid? What I also said is that some people might want make it a wider issue on the various forms of pressing oppression in the world.
Not sure how it's me that thinks that when you are literally the only person that has twice now said that brining up another cause of oppression literally "distracting". Mate you said that. No one else. What else could that mean?
Nope. Only strawman here is this by you since never once did I say people "HAVE" to protest "all" forms of oppression at the same time. I even mentioned specific cases, not all cases of oppression. People are free and welcome to champion whatever singular cause they want. What I am saying is that for some people that have a particular cause they're interested prior to this and then they see the oppression in America and maybe various other players it might flip a switch in their head that hey a lot of different people are being oppressed all of over the world not just these specific people I've be championing, I want to be inclusive a for a moment champion all oppressed people. Don't think there's anything at all wrong with that.
As I pointed to another user, for some people their social media bubble is not going to consist of a significant amount of people that are rebutting BLM. They see it as a general positive term and use it as such. We differ on allowing racist to own the term, I fully understand where you're coming from but where I'm coming from is I don't believe in allowing coordinated racist troll groups own whatever they put their minds to.
We're are in agreement on this then. I've never said any different.
They wouldn't angry. When did I say they would be angry? I literally said they he exact opposite. Just as we are getting somewhere you veer into another strawman which I said the exact opposite of
You're using whataboutism incorrectly in this case. What I am saying is that the people using all lives matter are not trying to discredit the fight against black oppression, they just adding to it.
This. Contrary to what some may think, there are people saying "all lives matter" who for reasons like language barriers, ignorance of context etc... think they're sharing a positive message that is compatible with or equivalent to BLM; that's part of what makes it such an insidious statement. But no-one should be saying it. You aren't "reclaiming" ALM when its origins and majority usage is as a tool of denial and obfuscation (or just a racist rallying cry).Then what's the issue, exactly? Anyone can talk about any type of oppression they want to, no one is stopping them. They probably shouldn't use the All Lives Matter framing though, since that was created specifically to downplay BLM as a movement. Maybe people in other countries are unaware of that, but if they are gonna jump into this conversation they can learn.