Black Lives Matter TOO

[Kilgore Trout]

To my understanding, this is what many state the message is supposed to be, so this one adjustment would probably clear up a lot of confusion about the message, as well as reduce resistance to the more ambiguous "black lives matter."

This being the case, I wonder how many would be willing to make such an adjustment.

 

[Revoltingest]

Your suggestion if far too intelligent & nuanced to gain wide acceptance.
(There's also a problem with its being racist because it isn't solely about black folk.)

 

[YmirGF]

I think that feeling a need to straighten this out is a sign of the inherent racism of white privilege.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think that feeling a need to straighten this out is a sign of the inherent racism of white privilege.

Ha - let's work on one emotionally-loaded, divisive, unproductive buzz-phrase at a time.

 

[SkylarHunter]

What about "all lives matter" ?

 

[George-ananda]

Both versions say the same thing to me..........someone's overemotional blather

 

[Politesse]

To my understanding, this is what many state the message is supposed to be, so this one adjustment would probably clear up a lot of confusion about the message, as well as reduce resistance to the more ambiguous "black lives matter."

This being the case, I wonder how many would be willing to make such an adjustment.

If you think this would "correct" anything, you don't understand what the problem is. Black lives, and deaths, have been erased up until now. That's what they are protesting. No one would object to also trying to call attention to the plight of other groups that have undergone similar erasure, such as the now popular #nativelivesmatter tag. But trying to claim that all lives are equal is wrong, because they have not been treated as such, at all. Nor will they, until we establish that people do and should care about folks that the police have had uncontrolled freedom to murder until now. You have to establish that someone matters at all before you can start making claims about so-called equality. There is no equality in this country, and shaming people for pointing out this obvious fact is not going to create equality.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If you think this would "correct" anything, you don't understand what the problem is. Black lives, and deaths, have been erased up until now. That's what they are protesting. No one would object to trying to call attention to the plight of other groups that have undergone similar erasure, such as the now popular #nativelivesmatter tag. But trying to claim that all lives are equal is wrong, because they have not been treated as such, at all. Nor will they, until we establish that people do and should care about folks that the police have had uncontrolled freedom to murder until now. You have to establish that someone matters at all before you can start making claims about so-called equality. There is no equality in this country, and shaming people for pointing out this obvious fact is not going to create equality.

So how does "black lives matter too" not communicate that black lives should be seen as equal as those of other races? If the assumption is that the perception is that white lives matter but black lives do not, then what is a more clear way of communicating this inequality than the phrase "black lives matter too."

Additionally, whatever group, racial or otherwise, that one could refer to, it would always be more clear and direct to communicate that their lives are equal to others with the phrase "X lives matter too," rather than simply "X lives matter."

 

[Politesse]

So how does "black lives matter too" not communicate that black lives should be seen as equal as those of other races? If the assumption is that the perception is that white lives matter but black lives do not, then what is a more clear way of communicating this inequality than the phrase "black lives matter too."

Because the point isn't to create "equal rights" between supposed races. I mean, that would be lovely, but it isn't the battle they are fighting. They want recognition that their lives matter at all. Saying "all lives are important" is just a cutesy PC way of arguing to not change anything and keep the status quo, the status quo in which black lives, and deaths, are routinely erased. No one who says "all lives matter" as a retort to "black lives matter" plans to do jack about the systematic inequalities that kill some of those "alls" way more than others.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

What about "all lives matter" ?

Well, because I've heard it stated that the fundamental point of the message is to communicate the perception that black lives have less value than white lives. This being the case, the phrase "black lives matter too," would be more effective at communicating the core idea of what they're trying to communicate than either "black lives matter" or "all lives matter," both of which are more broad, and thus, more ambiguous.

I have no problem with people wanting to communicate their perception of inequality in society. I just think if you're going to do it, then it would be more effective and productive to use unambiguous phrasing, and avoid emotionally-loaded language, if you're goal is actually to try to get other people to understand your message.

Assuming that "black lives matter too" is a less ambiguous, and more direct communication of what their message is, I'm just wondering how many people would willingly make this small adjustment in the interest of effective communication. And, if people are not willing, I'm wondering what their rationale would be, and what their true motivations actually are then.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Because the point isn't to create "equal rights" between supposed races. I mean, that would be lovely, but it isn't the battle they are fighting. They want recognition that their lives matter at all. Saying "all lives are important" is just a cutesy PC way of arguing to not change anything and keep the status quo, the status quo in which black lives, and deaths, are routinely erased. No one who says "all lives matter" as a retort to "black lives matter" plans to do jack about the systematic inequalities that kill some of those "alls" way more than others.

I can only assume you haven't actually read my original post or my response to you.

 

[Politesse]

I can only assume you haven't actually read my original post or my response to you.

What is it you think I don't understand?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

What is it you think I don't understand?

Your responses have no logical connection to anything stated in my posts. Please reread them again, this time paying special attention to reading comprehension.

Hint: my posts have nothing to do with using the phrase "all lives matter."

 

[Nietzsche]

To my understanding, this is what many state the message is supposed to be, so this one adjustment would probably clear up a lot of confusion about the message, as well as reduce resistance to the more ambiguous "black lives matter."

This being the case, I wonder how many would be willing to make such an adjustment.

It has to do with what sounds pleasing to the ear. "Black lives matter" is three words, something that is inherently more memorable to the human mind. The "too", while it would be better for the message as a whole, just feels/sounds(literally) superfluous.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It has to do with what sounds pleasing to the ear. "Black lives matter" is three words, something that is inherently more memorable to the human mind. The "too", while it would be better for the message as a whole, just feels/sounds(literally) superfluous.

Indeed, psychologically/emotionally, the shorter phrase has more of an impactful feel, which is one of the reasons why people gravitate towards it. However, you have to wonder whether the somewhat ambiguous message, and divisive response to the phrase, doesn't compound that impact for people. In other words, an emotional reaction - even a negative one - can often make the use of an impactful phrase even more rewarding. So, although people may, on one level, think their primary goal is to effectively communicate a message, their actual, immediate motivation can quickly turn into little more than self-righteous outbursting. Even a cursory look at the history of the use of jingoistic phrases and slogans bears this fact out.

 

[columbus]

Perhaps it should be "SOMETIMES BLACK LIVES MATTER".

Otherwise it carries implications about abortion, capital punishment, drug gangs and all the other causes of death to black people that wildly outrank police issues in terms of actual damage done.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Perhaps it should be "SOMETIMES BLACK LIVES MATTER".

This addresses the disparate coverage of deaths.
Whites killing blacks is big news.
Blacks killing blacks (more common) isn't even news.
Is the real need of the media (guilt ridden white liberals) s to find white racism?


Note that cops kill more white folk than black folk (except as a percentage of population).
Typically, the media only mention race when a white (or Hispanic) cop kills a black guy/gal.
So the publicly proffered problem of police putting people down is only because some are black?

 

[ChristineES]

What about "all lives matter" ?

That's what I was thinking. Scientists are now starting to say that there isn't any such thing as race anyway (Something I've been saying for about 35 years).

 

[Willamena]

To my understanding, this is what many state the message is supposed to be, so this one adjustment would probably clear up a lot of confusion about the message, as well as reduce resistance to the more ambiguous "black lives matter."

This being the case, I wonder how many would be willing to make such an adjustment.

Actually, it just diffuses the message.

If you think this would "correct" anything, you don't understand what the problem is. Black lives, and deaths, have been erased up until now. That's what they are protesting.

Making up a history for the message doesn't add anything to the message, and only damages it when the false history comes to light.

 

[columbus]

What about "all lives matter" ?

I could be wrong, but I believe this thread is in response to a particular event. A white politician was booed by the crowd chanting "Black Lives Matter" for saying "All Lives Matter".
There is another thread about it, if I recall correctly.
Tom