BLM Coalition Reveals 6 Point Policy Platform
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
+1 |
Anonymous
Jesus, read and do the math. Survivor, not descendants. Survivor of slavery. There are none. Don't worry too much about college, if your kids got their critical thinking skills from you. |
Anonymous
No, they would just bitch about how the calculations were biased against them. It's all so unfair!!! |
Anonymous
| The BLM will lose a lot of sympathy as a result of their preposterous "demands". Up until now, some whites thought BLM had some validity as a movement trying to bring attention to police violence against blacks, but this makes them look like a radical and racist group out for money and special privileges. |
Anonymous
|
In facing the new American dilemma, the relevant question is not: "What more does the Negro want?" but rather: "How can we make freedom real and substantial for our colored citizens? What just course will ensure the greatest speed and completeness? And how do we combat opposition and overcome obstacles arising from the defaults of the past?"
Certainly the Negro has been deprived. Few people consider the fact that, in addition to being enslaved for two centuries, the Negro was, during all those years, robbed of the wages of his toil. No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries. Not all the wealth of this affluent society could meet the bill. Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law. Such measures would certainly be less expensive than any computation based on two centuries of unpaid wages and accumulated interest. The moral justification for special measures for Negroes is rooted in the robberies inherent in the institution of slavery. Martin Luther King, Jr., "What We Can't Wait" (1963, 64), pp. 135, 137, 138. If this thread proves one thing, it is this: Americans don't subscribe to the philosophies of Martin Luther King, Jr. Never have, never will. Oppose reparations, oppose Martin Luther King. Refuse to ask what America can do for blacks, refuse to follow the teachings of Martin Luther King. It's that simple. It's that hard for most of you. |
Anonymous
|
OP here. You guys really love you some reparations, huh? Lots of people on here trying to reason away why we (the U.S.) should not owe AAs reparations. Opposition to the debt this country owes AAs is a clear denial of history. AA success in this country has happened DESPITE continued institutionalized racism and oppression.
It's undeniable that the U.S. government owes a moral debt to AAs. Period. I'm White/Asian, and I'm a lifelong conservative. I can easily admit this b/c history makes it very clear. We can disagree or debtate how we payback this debt, and who its specifically owed to, but to ignore it or explain it away with things like "Whites didn't own slaves" or "My family wasn't here, or didn't have slaves, so I shouldn't owe" is really meaningless. Its not about you personally. Its not about whites. Its not even completely about poverty. Its about the U.S. government as an institution and the atrocities it engaged in or allowed, for centuries, on the basis of skin color. The debt owed to AAs is with the U.S. government. We (tax paying citizens) pay for things we were directly not responsible for all the time. We have paid out billions to Iran, and middle eastern countries to right wrongs. We paid the Native Americans billions and allow tax breaks. We paid Japanese Americans billions, who were relatively new to this country BTW in general. We even paid slave owners reparations after abolishing slavery. Lets not stop there. We pay when government officials make mistakes or commit atrocities (e.g. police shootings, sexual harassment claims). We pay for policy failures of past federal and local admintrations with our tax dollars. Why all of sudden do we push the brakes when we talk about paying back the very people whose ancestors built this country for free with their blood? Why is THIS one the cardinal sin? This is baffling to me. For those fixated on "that was in the past we don't owe anyone anything," what about more current atrocities like the effective exclusion of blacks from the GI bill that help rebuild the white middle class, oppressive voting restrictions, housing discrimination, lack of access to credit, watered down affirmative action and civil rights laws, non-enforcement of civil rights laws, racial disparities in sentencing and LE practices. You want to focus on class and ignore race when the issues AAs faced were a direct result of race based policies. You don't think this would have lasting impact on a large % of the targeted group? The shit makes me furious just writing about it, and honestly I still don't understand why AAs as a group support the idea of big government. You want to talk about poor Whites, or the historical disenfranchisement of Asians? We can brainstorm policies to address that. But it does not diminish the debt the U.S. owes to AAs. One last thing: Using other countries as an example of how to deal with reparations is weak. We aren't Russia, China or some poor war torn third world country. This is America and we are supposed to be the greatest country in the world. We are supposed to be the lead. WTF would we copy standards from other countries? Or more specifically, since we have already paid reparations numerous times, why would would we only follow their lead when it applies to AAs? Stop it with this. |
Anonymous
| The slaves owned by just a few whites (and even by freed slaves themselves) are all dead. There is no one to pay reparations to. We have affirmative action in place to address " institutional racism." Reparations is nonsense as no one can demonstrate that they themselves suffered direct harm from slavery. The money grab needs to stop. It punishes those who did no harm to compensate those who had no harm done to them. |
Anonymous
OP here. Moving on from my rant. I felt the same way after reading it. I still feel this way to a certain degree, but I understand why those who support BLM or the "coalition" would want to have a more comprehensive and broader platform. Establishing a formal platform helps make them more mainstream. As a "leaderless" movement, it also makes it more difficult for the media and others to define them. Also, while focusing on police brutality is a noble cause, the issue itself is ultimately just a symptom of larger, more complex systemic issues. These larger issues are largely covered in their new platform. Lastly, while some of the issues like "fossil fuels" to me seem to be a disconnect of the previous focus of BLM, its actually highlights the fact that there are many of the issues facing AAs are really issues that impact everyone. Militarization of police, and lack of accountability of our government officials is bad for all of us. There is also one constant in all of their policy points: its directly focused on changing the way government works. As a conservative, I can get behind that. But I would love to talk with them about a handful of their proposed goals that are troubling at best. |
Anonymous
Who allowed slave owners to own slaves in this country? Would you like to phone a friend for this one? Affirmative action as a reparations "payment" to AAs is a joke. First, the law applies to a broad set up people, not just AAs. Second, it wasn't enforced well for majority of its existence. Third, the group that have benefited most economically from it has been white women. If someone flush with cash owed you $100, would you accept $100 payment spread out between 20 different people? Affirmative action is minimum deposit, at best. Try again. |
Anonymous
"I could go on and on, but these "demands" are insane. Besides, how did BLM - supposedly a movement against police brutality of blacks - expand to a list of demands that essentially create a privileged black class at the expense of whites?" Why can't BLM expand their movement? What will they need to do to make you feel good enough for you to care about anything they are saying? Thats what I thought. Also you keep bring up whites. This isn't a 1 for 1 here. We are talking about reparations for AAs. The U.S sanctioned atrocities specifically against AAs as an entire group. The U.S allowed or sanctioned the theft of black wealth. Those wrongs have had lasting impact on generations of AAs. Doesn't matter that some AAs are wealthy now. Or even President. Its a moral debt owed to AAs by the U.S government that has not been paid. |
Anonymous
If you can't win in a system that is rigged for you to win, then you've got problems. |
Anonymous
You would think. Problem #1 is that the payment would be waaaaay more than $20k. I honestly don't think a huge cash payment would be feasible or that helpful. It would need to be policy based. Ironic given who started this mess. 2) People can't even get a grip on history to even understand why the U.S. should even pay reparations to AAs. |
Anonymous
That's a good quote. MLK is certainly a hero and a great man. One of the best our country has ever produced. Have you heard about the Poor People's Campaign? MLK wasn't really big on capitalizing on racial strife. |
Anonymous
Reparations is only 1/6 of their platform, so no, I do not think people would be satisfied. Also, reparations couldn't be just for slavery. No, that wouldn't address the millions of blacks who had wealth literally stolen from them by the government (or allowed by the government to be stolen). Business, and property were outright stolen from AAs all the way through the early 1900s. Also, AAs were specifically excluded from job opportunities and from getting an education. They were experimented on by the government. This was b/c of race. B/c they were black. If you want to use a cutoff date for reparations, we could start with current and deceased who identified as "black" on the U.S. census in 1965 for obvious reasons, and work our way forward, if necessary. |
Anonymous
MLK was viewed as terrorist by the government and most non-black Americans while he lived. The MLK/America love affair didn't start until after he was dead. Go figure. Define: "racial strife" 
|