Red Flags of BLM Inc. – Part 2

October 20, 2020 ratingracism

Editors note – Black Lives Matter Inc. removed the “What We Believe” section from their website on September 21, 2020 with no explanation.

Part 1

What We Believe:

Essentially this is a repeat of the of the first paragraph in the “About” section. We need to reiterate, BLM does not intervene when violence is inflicted on Black communities by “vigilantes”, unless law enforcement is involved. If BLM was specifically about police brutality, the message should be clear and concise.

Vigilantes is vague and once again leaves the description open to interpretation. For example, 15 people were shot at a funeral in Chicago in July. BLM Inc. and BLM Chicago did not mention the horrific act perpetuated by vigilantes. A mass assault on Black people and BLM remained silent because the assailants were Black.

The description “violence inflicted by the state” is peculiar. Sounds like coded language. Keep reading to see if dots connect.

Right on, nothing wrong here. From a pedantic stand point – How about thriving together? Empowering one another together? Striving for excellence together? The phrasing “committed to struggling together” perpetuates negativity and broad disenfranchisement. Whatever happen to “yes I can!” Life is hard and there are many obstacles.

Encouragement, focus and discipline is necessary to achieve social, economic, and political success regardless of race (we are not naïve to know it is harder for Black people, but it is not impossible).

“Discipline is not the enemy of enthusiasm.” – Joe Clark

A movement like BLM is polarizing and the discussions need to be nuanced. Naturally, the Black community understands the feeling of being targeted and imbalanced acts of violence. An oversimplification of “rampant and deliberate violence inflicted on us by the state”, typically is summed up by stating Black people only makeup 13% of the population. However, Black people make up 32% of the fatalities by law enforcement.

Honest question, of the 32%, how many were justified? Criminals do exist and lethal force is necessary some times. What percentage is realistically satisfactory? 0%, 5%, 10%? Police tactics do need to be reformed. Greater accountability for dishonorable cops is needed. Honorable cops need to condemn bad cops who dishonor the badge. Bad cops make it hard for good cops to do their job. However, cops are necessary and abolishing the police is not the answer.

Why keep calling it state-sanctioned violence? Why not call it police brutality? The constant repeating of state-sanctioned violence seems like a Jedi mind trick. “State-sanctioned” seems subliminal for “country.” Calling the violence “state-sanctioned” gives credence to opponents who say BLM is anti-America or hates America.

While it reads “state-sanctioned”, some people may read it as “America-approved”. Start replacing “state-sanctioned” with “America-approved” and see what that does the psyche.

People can become disillusioned the state…aka America hates them. Classic manipulation technique. Pick a word close to your true target, align it with a separate issue, and repeat it over and over. The approach seems like a tactic from Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Specifically, parts of Rule 5, Rule 10, and Rule 12:

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

RED FLAG ALERT

In the description, BLM describes themselves as a political home for many. Therefore, BLM politized Black lives from the start. Black lives should not be politized. When advocates say “BLM is not a political organization, it is just a movement”, that is not entirely true.

By BLM’s own admission on their website, they advised BLM Inc. is a political home. We live in a two-party system. Intentionally pitting one party as racist for votes is a mockery of democracy. BLM is a decentralized movement and outside of Thousand Currents, the infrastructure is notoriously secretive and absent.

This statement indicates we should be able to see tangible results from BLM’s collective efforts. Fair warning, this statement is false as the following sections do not have any tangible, verifiable, or measurable results.

Staff? Who is the CEO and COO of Black Lives Matter Foundation, Inc.? Better yet, who is the CFO? BLM has raised millions of dollars without a trace of the disbursement.

People are going to start wondering – where is the money, what did the money go to, and who received the money?? To that we say…

Video shared for educational purposes in accordance with the Fair Use doctrine Section 107 of the Copyright Act

The NRA is under investigation for misappropriating funds. BLM will suffer the same fate if Black people do not feel tangible progress soon. Liberation and fighting for freedom is a façade.

Black people are free. What does tangible progress look like? What is the measuring stick? It is easy to say, “we want to be free!”, “we’re fighting social injustice!” What legislation is BLM developing?

BLM should invest in lobbyist to help push forward impactful legislation. BLM could hire Ice Cube since it appears they are devoid of a comprehensive plan.

Ordinarily, there is nothing wrong with the word “comrade.” Using the term “comrade” in any social justice or political capacity is questionable. Opponents believe the term expresses socialist intent or communist intent in plain sight. Was “comrade” intentional or an oversight? BLM could have gone with “friends.”

Avoiding questionable words can mitigate opponents manipulating the narrative. Unless, opponents are not manipulating the narrative because BLM is not shying away from disdain for capitalism.

Pause. “Respect and celebrate differences and commonalities.” This part is improbable and incomplete. Missing from this statement is “if and only if you agree with everything we say and think.”

If one does not agree with BLM, typically that person is labeled a racist, or “not down for the cause” and a “non-ally.” Listening to someone who has a different opinion is not respected or celebrated by BLM.

The stats are unavailable on BLM’s website for how many Black people have been freed due to BLM’s work. For example, Maya Moore literally is the reason Jonathan Irons was freed. We encourage everyone to read that story and her efforts.

BLM indicates they work vigorously for “all people.” We will let everyone decide for themselves on the accuracy of the statement. One could argue “all people” equates to…All Lives Ma…we digress.

We have reached the halfway point and so far, BLM’s success and “results of their collective efforts” are subjective and intangible.

To recap, BLM is amidst of sharing results of their efforts. BLM is lacking tangible actions that demonstrates enhanced quality of life for Black people. Communities have been ravaged by peaceful protesters transforming into looters and rioters by night fall.

BLM does not condemn looting, rather BLM condones looting. By BLM’s own admission, looting should be considered reparations. The opposite of restorative development is taking place in urban communities, peace be damned.