B.L.M

Nice reduction. Was it on purpose? Or did you just not spend too long thinking about it? Because it's fairly straight forward.

Black Lives Matter is specifically about police violence in black communities. It includes other assertions, but it's main one is that African Americans are treated with prejudice by our law enforcement and justice systems. As a movement, it literally didn't exist until stories of police shootings began circulating en masse on the internet. But recently, its proponents seem to have included any erasure of black presence into the movement regardless of if violence was involved. However, this still fits tightly with the theme of "Black Lives Matter". Because it still asserts that Black Lives Matter, just in a tangential way.

If I'm not wrong though, Malcolm X and MLK stood for a lot of different things. And Malcolm X became more moderate later in his life, in part from MLK's influence, and also because Nation of Islam is a fucking loony bin. If I'm not wrong, MLK stood more for inter-ethnic cooperation, and Malcolm X was concerned with intra-ethic self-sufficiency. Malcolm X's intra-ethnic philosophy also included that it was White America's responsibility to become more concerned with Civil rights without the needing the goading of African Americans. The movement they spearheaded was about police violence and prejudice, criminal justice prejudice, voting rights, segregation, and systematic discrimination.

So remind me again, which of these movements is more specific in its assertions and demands? If you cant, or won't, at least grow a sense of humor like

There were riots during Kings and Malcolm's times.

>What is the BLM movement for?
Curbing police brutality directed disproportionately at black youth.

>Do they have a legislative recommendation for the government?
Demilitarization of the american police + heavier screening for flags of racism.

Also I think Malcolm X would be very embarrassed by the modern african american community.

Malcolm would be pleased to see that BLM has properly radicalized their cause and divided whites and blacks.

MLK's family say that he would be disgusted with BLM, and they're probably right.

On what grounds would he? I don't know much about the guy so I mean this as a legitimate question.

If you're a reasonable person, you should understand that what you've said is suspect. It could easily be taken to be projecting a common, modern disdain for black American culture onto Malcolm X.

Considering the massive jump in improvement from then to now would probably be the first thing he noted.

The Black community always had a huge drug and poverty issues back then too and now. The list of Black notable people who were into drugs is pretty big for that time period like James Booker of that Washington DC mayor.

MLK was mostly a liberal, he preached equality, the acceptence and integration of black people into American society, individual rights and meritocracy.

BLM is basically a hard-line nationalist movement. they advocate for separation, ethnic pride and identity, collective benefits (such as reparations for past wrongs) based solely on race. basically, they don't see the situation as one group of Americans getting their rights violated, like MLK did. they see it as some kind of whites vs. blacks racial conflict.

So I guess Malcolm X would be more in favor of BLM, unlike King.

BLM is literally just nogs gettin assmad of twitter... and in IRL. compare the inanity of these """"""""protests"""""""""" to the original million man march -- which actually had goals and legislature that the protestors wanted enforced.

It's like le anonymoos OWS, they had no fucking direction so they just masturbated for the whole length of the "occupation"

I thought malcom X just wanted a separation of the two races, with no interdependence between the two.
I really can't see any current BLM member letting neo nazis into their conventions after all.

His children are fucking coons living off the coattails of their parents.

His oldest son charges tens of thousands for speeches, he lives in the shadows of his father and having worked with him is a pampered ass hole who does nothing real for the community beyond press b.s.

My boss worked for Coretta, she was a leader and would probably advocate for BLM as much as she did LGBT rights and who stated her husband would support.
Wealthy people do drugs, stop the presses!
It's not nationalist, it's pluralist.

based Steve Biko (the most sane anti-apartheid freedom-fighter) would classify BLM as blacks seeking Psychological freedom, having already -- prematurely he would add -- achieved physical freedom.

He actually specifically says, Blacks must attain psychological freedom; to cast off the mental chains of their oppressors, to find meaning in being black. Then, and only then, can blacks (who have attained self-worth) go about physically-politically freeing themselves..... he also said that whites who supported ending apartheid must support from the sidelines, so that the freedom movement actually represented an upward surge of black independence -- as opposed to white-assisted paternalism.... which is what we (as well as you burgerikans) got.

TL;DR Steve Biko should be mandatory reading for BLM

>implying BLMers actually read books

Awww so can I ask are you a white radical or black and aware :3

It's nice see someone mention Biko, especially on Veeky Forums

m8 i just want weed legalized here so everyone in SA can chill the fuck out.

srsly, man -- everytime I see ppl on /pol/ chimpin' out about chimpouts I just wanna tell them; like IT'S SO FUCKIN SIMPLE MAN! just give Affs weed and they're golden

but, to answer your question: I'm "white", though JEuro-mutt would make more sense tbqh

Strong words, you sound biased.

It'd be more productive to look at how massive, decentralized organization on social media have been developing since the advent of social media on the internet. This definitely isn't the first time. And you ignore any possible shortfalls of the activism of the million man march. One of which is that the talented demagogues of MLK's time were absolutely crucial to organizing it.

So let's do a thought experiment. What are some situations where a decentralized model of organizing people(think voluntaryism and honor policing) might be useful. And what are some situations where our traditional, centralized ways of organizing activism is preferable?

This seems to actually mirror a lot of what I see in online activism. Whether or not they've read him, it seems to be a common sentiment that the role of white allies ought to be passive and encouraging rather than active and deliberative.

I agree as well, to an extent. But a good idea is a good idea no matter who it comes from.

You're a saffer? Interesting to see one who knows Biko beyond the basics textbooks most on here spew kanker.

MLK would be ashamed of it because he fought for equality while BLM wants even more race segregation.

>Want cops to stop killing black people
>Race segregation.

....do white people really think this? Like does anyone read anything he says other than "I have a dream"?

Malcolm X is just as much as a black stain as BLM

If they want cops to stop killing them maybe they should stop being violent and breaking the law

anyways, just google 'black lives matter segregation' and you will have lots of articles about it

maybe blacks should stop getting into so many confrontations with cops

....it's summer in Australia

what?

>Cops kill black dudes for literally no good reason.
>Black people protest.
>Lol, niggers. No wonder the cops keep killing you.
Yeah, nah. The problem isn't "black people are violent". The problem is a lot of cops are scum and will kill people even for not being violent.

They have every right to be angry. The police don't even bother to treat them as humans. No one in history has ever gotten treated well by governments who don't by simply asking for it, and when riots happen in response to such gross injustice it's nothing short of beautiful.

Your response is that of a teenager who does not understand the confrontations and seeing how late it is I'm assuming you're Australian.

Gurley was not confrontational, Garner was not confrontational, most were not confrontational and abrasive force was used.

A white /pol/ /K/ white supremacist shot up an entire church of black people and was taken in alive then fed Burger King.

>Be black
>Be in Walmart
>Be buying a BB gun
>Someone calls the cops on a black guy daring to buy a fucking BB gun.
>Police show up and just shoot him without any altercation.
>Police get off scot free.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III

>American
>Justice
>System

Nah, BLM doesn't have a central committee and is not anticapitalist enough

"Two officers of the Beavercreek Police arrived at the Walmart shortly after their dispatcher informed them of a "subject with a gun" in the pet supplies area of the store and Crawford was shot"

They did nothing wrong given that

Don't forget the black weeb who was killed by police for having a toy Katana

yeah fuck pigs xD

shot in the back, too

very clever

I thought this was America.

Since when is it a crime to buy any gun let alone just a BB gun? Let alone a crime worth killing someone over.

Yeah that's unironically true.

Aren't these chuckleheads allegedly our
>best
>and
>brightest

Isn't there a whole doctrine of negotiation in talking people down from violence? Where was that?

How hard would it be, if the threat is enough to shoot; to hold a perimiter around a store that literally has two exits, consult with store security over current footage, and act rationally?

I suppose my apprehension to BLM was the fact that it started from the deaths of thugs like trayvon martin and michael brown.
Did any well respected BLM members eventually seperate themselves from those shootings after the evidence came out?

if you are a felon, it is illegal to own and acquire firearms.
shit sucks, but thats the rules.
bit past your bedtime isn't it.

Malcolm X would call them a bunch of pussies, MLK would bitch and moan and hippy bullshit.

>The police don't even bother to treat them as humans.
Maybe blacks should start treating others like human too

it certainly is a two way street.

1. He wasn't indicted for a felony.
2. Even if he was the police don't have a right to murder people for buying things they aren't allowed to have, you can't murder kids for trying to buy alcohol. Although I'm sure if the kid was black it wouldn't stop them.

Excessive force for both and Trayvon had every right to fight a potentially dangerous man who was told by police to not follow him.
Black on black crime like white on white crime is a result of most crimes being intraracial.

Maybe the police should stop shooting the ones who do.

>excessive force

Its a shame the courts and jury disagree.

Which is exactly why the US justice system is fucked.

For what, letting people defend themselves against a violent aggressor?

They won't get it user

Pretty sure the dude stalking people armed with a gun and ignoring police commands not to is the aggressor here, Trayvon was just defending himself.

>Excessive force for both
Ah yes, bigoted racist cops for killing a guy who robbed a store and later tried to attack the officer when confronted.

Get what?
It was his job as the neighborhood watch to you know, watch the fucking neighborhood.
And in any case, it was Trayvon who struck first.

>Neighborhood watch being a make-believe cop
>Somehow this is within any right of the neighborhood watch.

lmao

The store owner stated he didn't steal anything

A minor defending himself from a person who's 1. Not police and 2. Told by the dispatcher not to profile and follow the minor.

You seem to have left out the part where both of these youths were the ones to initiate a physical altercation.

>The store owner stated he didn't steal anything
youtube.com/watch?v=mkOfqIXkBRE

>The store owner stated he didn't steal anything
justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/doj_report_on_shooting_of_michael_brown_1.pdf
Are you telling me that you don't trust the department of justice?
Also wilson was just doing his job.
Unless of course you're telling me that running up to a police officers car after having just commited a crime and just beating him with your fists is normal. desu brown's death is even more black and white than martins.

"achsully, it's about integrity in the U.S police!"

No. BLM may have started as a protest against violence on black people, (even then it was based on fear mongering) but has very quickly transformed to a more intersectional movement mainly about race, but some have dragged gender and sexuality in as well.

Veeky Forums just has sympathy to the movement because of perceived power structures.

And in any case, it was Trayvon who struck first.
This is not a hard concept, it is not illegal to follow someone you deem suspicious, it is however a crime to assault someone.
Furthermore, it is not a crime under Florida law to use lethal force if your have reasonable fear of your life being in immediate danger.

Trayvon was being followed by a hostile man late at night who had a gun.

If a white boy killed a black man stalking him with a gun Veeky Forums would commend him as a national hero.
countercurrentnews.com/2014/08/ferguson-store-owner-says-he-doesnt-believe-thats-mike-brown-on-surveillance-video/

>Furthermore, it is not a crime under Florida law to use lethal force if your have reasonable fear of your life being in immediate danger.
This is what I'm saying

Trayvon did have every right to defend himself here.

What's Veeky Forums opinion on the death of freddie gray?
IMO seems to be a major abuse of police power but for some reason the media reports never seemed to include the part where black officers were in part responsible.
Were they justified?

Trayvon had no knowledge that Zimmerman was armed, though.

If you're asking me if police and law enforcement will protect their image regardless of what they actually did than yes.

It sounds like the police were out of order.

Tbqh, I would be edgy around a group of people that I knew to be 12% of the population, yet committed 49% of the murders as well.

Nobody denies that many cops in the states are scum, but what do you expect when you employ PTSD-ridden ex-military, and it literally takes just a few months to become a police officer?

Here in my country becoming a police officer is equivalent to a Bachelor's degree in schooling, and after that schooling you need to be supervised for 2 years in the field by a senior officer before you become one yourself officially.

How do you know Trayvon did not see the gun before dying? How does defending yourself against a dangerous stalker in anyway incriminate the stalked?

>Also wilson was just doing his job.
Yeah we all know it's the police's job to kill black kids, doesn't mean it's right either way.

>he wuz a good boy

What should I believe, video footage of his robbery or a statement?

It's right to defend yourself from an aggressive, big guy who is attacking you.

Since Blacks murder so many Whites compared to their population numbers, maybe we should be shooting more.

>dude he was following me so I tried knocking him out lmao
Bravo, an airtight self defence case.
Not.

Yeah, and it's right to defend yourself against a creepy ass cracker that's stalking you.

Especially when he later reveals himself to be armed and prepared to kill.

I believe the person who was actually there and not a video that is decontexualized.

The police didn't even know he was accused of robbery, which is even more telling of their interaction with Brown.

As a white European I have no idea what I'm talking, but it seems to me, that BLM is the continuation of Malcom X's way of resisting the oppressive regime.
Just that it suffers the same problems as every other modern civil movement (occupy, Arab spring...), it's way to dispersed, and the ideas of what they're fighting for are way to vague.

pic

Because he was still fucking stupid enough to punch Zimmerman in the back of the head after Zimmerman began walking away.

lol follow somebody around at night and see what happens

>Stalking people is okay now, and in no way gives you reason to believe you're in danger.

lmao

>I believe the person who was actually there

The man might fear for his life though. Going "anti-blm" in a neighborhood where what happened in that video happened might not be the wisest idea.

Wilson stalked him now?

>Wilson had been notified by police dispatch of the robbery and descriptions of the two suspects.

I guess they didn't know about it

Yeah, we sure saw didn't we.

You need to look up the definition of stalking, because following someone on a public road late at night when you're neighborhood watch is not stalking.

Sorry I thought you were a different user.

sources for the numbers?

Except what Zimmerman was doing literally is stalking, he was stealthily following this particular person.

oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/stalk?q=stalking#stalk-2

Stalking is not grounds for self defence.
Being physically assaulted is.

How do you know for sure what happens when all we have is Zimmerman's testimony and we've seen his violent streak since the trial?
The store owner did not call police and the store owner stated he did not see a theft occur.
Police told him not to follow

Yes it is.

And you already know everyone on Veeky Forums would agree if it was a black dude stalking a white girl.

>'LOOK AT ME DA WHITEY EVIL FUCK DA WHITEY'
When have we heard this before?

>Yes it is.

No it isn't. Following people on public property is not a crime.

>Shortly before the shooting, Brown stole several packages of cigarillos from a nearby convenience store and shoved the store clerk who tried to stop him. Brown was accompanied by his friend Dorian Johnson

must be a lie made up by racists