Slog
Aug 9, 2015 12:59 PM
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Comments
Remember who made crack cocaine subject to bigger penalties and unarmed drug crimes a five to ten year sentence?
Imagine if there was no protest at the Bernie event yesterday. Imagine if nobody witnessed how quickly the white liberal crowd turned on the BLM protesters. What would we be talking about?
The news would be how Bernie has everyone excited to join his political revolution and how Ciara and Russell Wilson joined Taylor Swift on stage to the cheering throngs of Seattle's white tween community.
Nothing to see here, no race problem in Seattle.
We'd be all warm and cozy remembering how Bernie shouted, "Thank you Seattle for being so progressive!"
#BernieMatters #IStandWithTaylorSwift
The number of Seattlites who take BLM seriously just reached a new low. The BLM movement is similar to the B movement I had this morning. It made a splash but then I realized it was just a stinky pile of crap.
Along with privileges comes responsibility. It is the responsibility of those who don't have to deal directly with the imbedded racism to be able to address a wider arc of injustice in the world. This is exemplified in the Sanders campaign.
What Ms. Johnson and Ms. Willaford and their compatriots did yesterday was not disrupting the institutional injustice. They were demanding that attention be paid *only* to their cause, and not to the many other causes that are just as important. Yes, of course Black Lives Matter, and this is not an issue that should be ignored. But what they were actually saying is that Native Americans should be ignored. Economic slavery should be ignored. Global climate change should be ignored. Returning America from the oligarchy that it has descended into should be ignored. That is what these women were saying when, after being allowed access to the mic, they refused to relinquish it.
What I saw were two women who, flushed with a newly-held power (speaking in front of thousands! taking the mic from a presidential candidate! wow!), instead of speaking of our connections and our collective fight for justice, used it to boost their petty ego games. They derided and insulted their audience, belittled the concerns of those gathered, and showed that they can't be trusted. I don't think they care about Michael Brown at all. He's only a symbol for them beat other people over the head with and use him as way to garner self-pity. I find that a fairly disgusting way to use a man who should be alive and well right now, instead of murdered by those who enforce the injustice of our country. Basically, they're no different than the many trolls who live here on Slog: their own petty attitudes are the only thing that matter and fuck everyone else.
Their error is in failing to realize that they are free to dedicate their lives to a single cause, whereas others are committed to many causes, each one important. Because the true fight is against injustice, a fight that anyone can join in. Those that fight for justice, whether it be a specific cause or many, recognize it in others. To those who are only interested in their own petty fight, everyone else, everyone who doesn't look like them or isn't enslaved to that specific fight, is an enemy.
I think that we need to do a lot more about police violence but they aren't talking about the right way to go about it.
We need to remove the police's job as revenue generators. We need to continue to liberalize drug laws. We need to remove the profit motive from prison. We need to take the next economic step to counteract job loss due to labor reducing technology and to make sure that we have a society that works for everyone.
The race problem is based on a systemic perversion of a very primal part of our psyches that was developed early on that makes us fear and hate what isn't like us. The thing is that the way it works now it is directed specifically at black people. The way it naturally works isn't that specific. Naturally it works for everyone that isn't like you and will most likely take centuries if not thousands of years to fix.
The stuff I talked about above would fix a lot of things and might actually work in our lifetime.
Yes, Black Lives Matter. Criminal justice reform (top to bottom, police to prosecutors to courts) is urgently needed everywhere in this country. This particular protest did nothing to advance this vital cause, but it surely benefited HRC in today's news cycle, just in time for the Sunday Morning Blowhards.
Well said.
That's a perfectly legitimate reaction. Radicals are fucking mental, they're gonna destroy BLM.
That's the most down-to-earth well-articulated commentary SONLI has ever written. And we've collided many a time, too.
He said that the move away from community policing is to blame. Instead of the police being trusted and relied on, black communities frequently see cops as the enemy, and cops see those same people as needing punishment rather than protection. His take on the issue is that police departments need to rebuild those connections to the community so that they're welcomed, rather than met with hostility.
This is a pretty huge point, as it would certainly serve a couple of particular interests to send in phony disrupters: 1) those who wish to discredit the BLM movement and 2) those who wish to disrupt Sanders' campaign.
Has there truly been enough investigation of this? Because I'm seeing this referenced as "BlackLivesMatter protesters disrupt..." in headlines all over the net, when all I'm actually gathering from the reports is that two women who claimed to be BLM disrupted an event. But if there's no previous and/or significant association with these two and BLM, shouldn't that be a key focus of these articles and shouldn't "purported" or "alleged" be appearing in these headlines?
Is it being at all considered that Bernie Sanders might not be the end-target at all, but simply a means of driving a wedge between progressives and BLM? What better way to do it than to send phony BLM ops against a darling of the progressive movement?
Am I wrong to be a bit skeptical here?
"How do we call people in even as we call them out?" - what a great question, I will be sharing it far and wide.
Honestly, I think I agree that they should have relinquished the mic and allowed the event to continue as well. But I realized years ago that although I don't understand more radical forms of protest, they have their place. Would the headline reading BLACK LIVES MATTER MIC CHECKS BERNIE SANDERS BEFORE ALLOWING HIM TO CONTINUE AS IF NOTHING HAD HAPPENED been nearly as effective?
Some enjoy getting pissed off
Sane folks like neither
And as a result, many people are now saying they can no longer "support" BLM - as if they ever really gave it more than tacit lip-service in the first place - what a crock.
Is that really how you're summing this all up?
it's like fundamentalists insisting we solve mental illness before we address the plague of mass shootings.
I think that was even stated false in an episode of the TV show Castle.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/sutton.asp
While lore would have it that the bank robber replied "Because that's where the money is" to that common question, Sutton denied ever having said it. "The credit belongs to some enterprising reporter who apparently felt a need to fill out his copy," wrote Sutton in his autobiography. "I can't even remember where I first read it. It just seemed to appear one day, and then it was everywhere."
This stunt was just words with little behind it, providing a shot of publicity that will fade when the next thing rolls around.
We teach our kids every day in schools to stand up to bullying, but when you had your chance you failed. And in writing your neutral “feelgood” piece here, you continue to fail. You are one of our rising politicians, and you certainly know that you can’t make everybody happy all the time. Sometimes you have to take a stand, and you have failed to do that – so you are no better than the other politicians (of both parties) who dodge questions, obfuscate, and take the safe road.
The crowd (any crowd in that situation) was understandably angry. The girls on stage were rude and intransigent. You (and the “multiracial coalition” you refer to) were the only ones in a position to make things right – but you stood by and let Bernie twist in the wind. He was a guest in your house – you took your moment in his spotlight, and then you ran and hid, and let him down.
Fail.
2) “When the disruption first happened, the crowd (mostly white) turned ugly.” The disruption was ugly. Did you not see those girls screaming in those men’s faces? Such rude disrespect. Beyond ugly. Chicken or egg? Really? The girls were uninvited, rude, inconsiderate, bullying brats. They should have been booed. If BLM wanted to speak at the program they should have asked. Is it a cultural thing. I was taught to respect my elders.
3) You don’t know what is right? We all pretty much learn that in kindergarten. Play nice, be polite, take your turn etc etc. Not rocket science. You all can rationalize those girl’s actions all you want but the facts are the facts. Most white people who supported the movement were offended by those girls actions toward Senator Sanders, the organizers and the crowd.
4) You sound pretty full of yourself telling Mr. Sanders what he should and shouldn’t do and say.
5) I really don’t see where you all get off “calling Senator Sanders out.” I don’t get it. I am a mature adult. When I grew up we didn’t “call people out.” That expression meant looking for a fight and well, in most circles it just wasn’t done. Unless you know you were a biker or something.
I WAS 100% behind the BLM movement. Done now. I know, I know, I’ve been told already by some angry people on twitter that they don’t need me, good because you all are going to have to do it on your own because you seem hell bent on alienating the rest of us that were on board with you.
Also, the crowd was fine until these two children started name-calling and accusing the ENTIRE CITY of being full of white supremacists. These children were given their time and that wasn't enough - why? - they weren't here for discussion; their stated goal (on their private Facebook group) was to prevent Bernie from speaking. They are not part of the BLM movement, they're anarchists from Outside Agitators 206. https://www.facebook.com/outsideagitator…
Tragic.
But instead of offering specific ideas she gives us platitudes that among other things tacitly condone the bullying that's behind this highly theatrical (very mediagenic!) infantile tantrum.
In what ways does BLM see this as a success? Would they do it the same way again?
Also, it seems to me that the flexibility Sanders showed was a big deal, as was his ability to make decisions on the spot without consulting some string-puller.
The protagonists state on their Facebook page and their webpage that they seek, "an end to police terror, an end to the slavery that is the prison system, and we want the people who profit from these systems held accountable." White progressives should be cool with that, right?
They also claim to be the "Black Lives Matter Seattle Co-Founders."
Are we not to take them at their word?
"T-they're outside agitators! There's no way this could be the natural consequence of identity politics!"
Yeah lemme guess the disrupters were paid agents of the Republican Party/the Koch Brothers/the Illuminati. I'm calling next week's Salon articles right now.
The agenda of these women made little to no sense. They were all over the map and frankly, confrontational from the start. Their goal appeared to be to waste as much time as possible and piss off the crowd. Funny the author fails to mention they called the crowd "liberal white supremacists". And as Bernie and the event organizers tried to talk calmly with them, they proceeded to scream bloody murder in everyone's face.
I hate to break out the tinfoil hat, but this stinks of a set-up from the Hillary camp. Bernie was in a no-win situation. If he confronted the protesters verbally, he's a racist. If he does nothing, many will see him as weak or unable to control a situation. The continued attacks on Bernie from BLM appear to be an attempt divert the main message of his campaign away from economic equality - and just as he's climbing in the polls and attracting more or Hillary's supporters and even some registered Republicans.
http://mlkseattle.org/pages.php?submitte…
Agreed. I like Pramilla but as a woman of color she seems afraid to be critical of others of color. She has certainly judged whites much more directly but that's given an easy pass these days.
Or maybe it's just because she is now a politician whose goal is to be re-elected.
After Obama's turn ends in 2016, the US will go from a country in which African-Americans held power over one of the three branches of Government, to most likely a scenario where blacks are left with one Justice, a handful of Congressmen, and candidates who are all white and have not uttered one sentence about how they might continue to enforce racial fairness.
It'll never happen. Old, white Seattle liberals are too afraid of offending anyone's delicate sensibilities to ever get that agitated about anything besides whether their organic, free-range granola is fair-trade or free-trade, and who gets to plug their Leaf into the e-charger next.
GENERAL change is incremental; years of SPECIFIC actions create it, compose it.
there is little argument that this was a clumsy specific action - but it has already created incremental change.
I can say I'm a member of the Romulan Star Empire, but that doesn't make it reality. These women intentionally masqueraded as members of an organization they are not members of.
At this point, we absolutely should not take them at their word. They are publicly known liars and charlatans.
"I do not think he'll listen, lad."
If you want to adopt such an all encompassing title like black lives matter you must also accept that your tactics will be critiqued.
granted the people that didn't get to hear him speak missed out but Bernie will continue to inform people on his stances and people will continue to rally around him. blm will still be active and bringing people together for a common cause instead of creating tension and divisiveness like the 2 yahoos did.
they are the ones that lost, they had a platform to reach the nation, Bernie practically handed them the mic, and they squandered it.
Bernie is now seen as weak and milquetoast by many within the Democratic establishment for not standing up to the protesters. Granted, had he stood up, those same members of the establishment would have been able to portray him as racist. But to the people Bernie needs to endear himself to in order to win the nomination (remember, delegates often are not required by law to vote a specific way, this varies wildly by state), this action did him no favors. The political movers and shakers needed to be wooed away from Hillary and to Bernie's side if he is to win, and now those movers and shakers have less of a reason to leave the establishment candidate. I've heard many people (some even posted on some of these Slog threads) talk about how they're now not going to vote for Bernie as a direct result of his "lack of leadership". The impression is if he can't handle two agitators, how is he going to handle Putin?
Both sides were measured in their speech, yes. But they were measured in their speech because that was the best option they had. For people who wanted to see them get up on a soapbox and actually lead, their measured responses were pitiful mewlings.
Not sure I agree with that. As a 70 year old man who may well (understandably) struggle to mount the energy to engage in these efforts, he just might lose the motivation to do so going forward. And that'd be a shame.
"Somebody said it on Twitter, it MUST be true!"
And there you have it.
of all the people to interrupt and try to bring down, Bernie Sanders is -not- the person. he's the one who has been fighting for civil rights since before you were in diapers.
'Bernie and BLM didn't react they way i thought they should, waaaahhhh'
@89, I still support both Bernie and BLM. I'm not the court of public opinion, however. I do agree though, that individuals on either side who let this sway their opinion weren't truly allies to their reported causes.
http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/08…
i'm sure this milquetoast do nothing senator has never had to deal with something as imposing as a couple of women trying to shout him down.
BERNIE SANDERS is not a 70+ year old WHITE GUY.
BERNIE SANDERS is a 70+ year old JEWISH GUY.
The JEWISH PEOPLE are the MOST OPPRESSED IN HUMAN HISTORY.
To have a BLACK PERSON (African decent?) stand up and lecture a JEWISH PERSON - who USED TO BE SLAVES TO THOSE SAME AFRICAN PEOPLE - on civil rights and racism? IS FUCKING PREPOSTEROUS!
FURTHERMORE - the SINGLE BEST CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENCY that #BlackLivesMatter movement COULD POSSIBLY ask for in the White House?
It would MOST CERTAINLY have to be a non-black person with strong "white" support base who actually understands and fully supports the BLM cause and the racism issue - no?
Obama certainly wasnt a good candidate for attacking racism in America, was he? No - racism just got worse under his presidency.
So tell me you false-BLM campaigners who ruined an event in Seattle and embarrass everyone else who really is a BLM campaigner --- HOW IS IT EVEN POSSIBLE to get a better candidate than a "white guy" who also comes from an oppressed ethnic group, and who actually marched with MARTIN LUTHER KING and got ARRESTED for CIVIL RIGHTS PROTESTING in the 60's/70's????
Because that candidate is BERNIE SANDERS and you will most likely NEVER GET ANOTHER CHANCE to support a candidate that has these credentials.
WAKE UP YOU FOOLS!
THIS FIGHT IS TOO IMPORTANT FOR US ALL TO FIGHT AMONGST OURSELVES!
I was formerly an abused woman. For a long time I didnt trust any man. Then I learned that some men are okay. This is where I feel the black community is now....hurling pain at white people across the board, but you're alienating your allies and giving fuel to the haters and bad men. Please...every time I see one of these posts I reach out again and again. It won't matter though, because in this climate all white people are the enemy. Want to draw us closer together? We need "relationship counseling" that goes beyond name calling and blaming. As a country, we need to find our strengths together. At this point...keeping positive is a burden.
I am touched by your tone and your heart on this issue. While I don't support Bernie Sanders for a variety of reasons, I can certainly appreciate some of his ideas. On the issue of racism in our country I strongly resonate with your sentiments and attitude and I am tired of our partisanship dividing us on such important issues. Warm regards, keep up the "good" fight.
The protestors were wrong. By assuming that their protest was more meaningful, more important than the efforts of the organizers of the event, the message of Senator Sanders, and the rights of the thousands of people gathered to hear that message, you are saying that black lives matter MORE than the rights of others. MLK never said that black lives matter more, only that they mattered the same. Your refusal to condemn the disruption of the gathering only proves that you do in fact believe that black lives matter more. You are WRONG.
That said, I do not appreciate anybody coming into my city, my hometown of which I am deeply proud, and call us "white supremicist liberals". My initial reaction is to say FUCK YOU to you and your bullshit disruption. Don't come into my house, thinking you can insult my family and then expect me to listen to your grievance, however righteous your grievance might be.
And just to "keep it 100" here, there is something to be said for pulling the log out of your own eye before worrying about the mote in someone else's. There are many, many issues within the Black community that must also be addressed, including the demise of the family unit (absent fathers), that require a bit of self evaluation.
But hey, it is easier to blame "the other" for our problems. As long as its somebody else's fault that we are in the situation, whatever it may be, that we are in, we can ignore our own actions.
Unless and until we, as a nation, are willing to have that much ballyhooed "grown-up conversation" about race relations - and not talk past each other - this isn't going to get better.
To what degree did it increase public understanding of and empathy for BLM?
How has it supported recruitment efforts?
How has it improved BLM access to political candidates in order to be a respected partner in the political dialog on the national stage?
Please cite verified tactical field data in your response. (Anecdotal data will not be accepted.) However, in its absence, I am willing to accept the idea that any publicity is good publicity for "furthering the movement". If that's the case, it's as if you've take a page out of Donald Trump's playbook. Good for you.
If you don't like my material, you can always, you know, just stop responding to it. And so far, I've seen exactly ZERO comments refuting anything I've said to-date on the subject. Additionally, since you seem to be so hung up on the concept of "who's in charge here", I would point out that, as of now there has been no "official" condemnation of the disruption by anyone affiliated with BLM, no disavowal that the protesters are not members of BLM (and no, I'm sorry, but I'd be willing to bet that a 16 year old kid posting an "apology" on FB doesn't meet either of our standards), and furthermore, according to news reports, the Portland "chapter" has actually come out in support of it. So, much for your assertions on those points, but, hey, you just keep on whitemansplaining Malcolm X for the rest of us, and keep believing he would have approved of your doing so, m'kay?