I don't understand "black lives matter"

[DaveR]

"I'm really not sure what riles so many on this thread about the movement. Why can't the black community in your view come together in protest against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an under current of 'we don't really think you have it that bad, so just be quiet' among the objectors that I find unsettling."

Is the BLM movement in the UK protesting about unarmed shootings in the US (in which case why are they blockading Heathrow instead of marching to the US embassy) or are they concerned about unarmed shootings in the UK (in which case, by any sensible comparison this is a vanishingly small problem, and there are better targets for their energy)

I am sympathetic to any campaign to eradicate prejudice, especially from the law enforcement/criminal justice system, but I don't buy this.

[Loz]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you really care, educate yourself about the issues you are raising. If you don't really have

> the time or inclination to do a deep dive into the political issues at hand (which is totally

> understandable), stop criticizing something you don't actually know much about.

1) Please read the whole thread before picking out one comment, as you don't seem to have followed the context in which it was written. There was a whole conversation around that post and stats. Read the previous posts and you will see the context of why those stats are in that post. And especially read the first line of my post.

2) Don't use the term 'educate yourself'. It is only used by pompous idiots who think their view on a subject is the only acceptable view, and I doubt you want people to think that of you.

[Loz]

civilservant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> According to the Prison Reform Trust, "Out of the British national prison population, 10% are black

> and 6% are Asian. For black Britons this is significantly higher than the 2.8% of the general

> population they represent.

The current prison population is 93% male, compared with 49% of the population.

[rendelharris]

civilservant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I understand the reluctance to jump on the BLM

> band-wagon, but we need to look at the UK figures

> before getting too complacent

>

> According to the Prison Reform Trust, "Out of the

> British national prison population, 10% are black

> and 6% are Asian. For black Britons this is

> significantly higher than the 2.8% of the general

> population they represent. (...) According to the

> Equality and Human Rights Commission, there is now

> greater disproportionality in the number of black

> people in prisons in the UK than in the United

> States."

>

> I'm sure that I can find the figures about UK

> racial disproportionality in toughness of

> sentencing if you ask nicely.

>

> so if we want to craft our own band-wagon, there's

> plenty of material from which to build it.

> the question is, do you want to, or is this thread

> just a convenient stick with which to beat the

> 'political correct'?

If you're referring to my use of the term bandwagon, I feel I should make it clear I wasn't necessarily saying BLM over here was bandwagon jumping, just that it does offer opportunities for opponents to characterise it as that.

There is massive disproportion in sentencing in the UK, with BAME defendants 25% more likely to be jailed for similar crimes and when jailed receiving, on average, around 20% longer sentences. There are many other problems which also need addressing.

The question I was asking was simply is adopting a USA movement which exists mainly to protest against something which really is not a problem in the UK - i.e. the shooting of unarmed young black men - the best way to go about protesting about these issues? If the BLM protestors in the UK are protesting about the shootings in the USA then fine (though as someone mentioned above, the US embassy would seem the logical place to do that), but I've certainly been given the impression that they're protesting about the treatment of black people in the UK.

That's not, by the way, saying 'we don't really think you have it that bad, so just be quiet.' It's saying yes you do have it bad, yes you should make a noise, is this the most appropriate/effective way of doing so?

[Otta]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm really not sure what riles so many on this

> thread about the movement. Why can't the black

> community in your view come together in protest

> against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an

> under current of 'we don't really think you have

> it that bad, so just be quiet' among the objectors

> that I find unsettling.

That's kind of putting words in to people's mouths LM.

I would likely support a BLM movement with a clear purpose (I say likely because I'd want to know what the clear purpose was). But when I saw those people blocking the road to Heathrow, I just thought "do you even know why you're doing this?".

[Loz]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you saying that until all social issues are resolved that impact all groups, black

> people have no right to advocate for changes specifically impacting their community?

> Why does that make sense to you?

No, I didn't say that at all. But I assume you must have known that, as you didn't quote anything I've written that comes anywhere close to saying that.

Why are you putting words in people's mouths and setting up nonsensical strawmen?

[Jeremy]

I do agree that the UK BLM protests do seem odd, as the problem doesn't really exist here.

civilservant's example of disproportionate prison numbers isn't really comparable IMO. That discussion should be more about the social conditions which have lead to these statistics. It has nothing to do with unarmed men being shot.

[JohnL]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Surely 'black live matter' is an

> incontrovertible

> > truism. In the wake of some high profile

> shootings

> > of unarmed black men, it seems to me like a

> > completely appropriate slogan around which to

> > campaign. I don't get the objections.

>

>

> As an American I can say you've nailed it. The

> BLM began as a response to the acquittal of the

> shooter of Trevon Martin who was an unarmed

> teenager walking to his own house who was shot by

> a neighbour who perceived him as a threat. Since

> then the movement has largely focused on excessive

> police force including killings involving unarmed

> black men and women.

>

> I'm really not sure what riles so many on this

> thread about the movement. Why can't the black

> community in your view come together in protest

> against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an

> under current of 'we don't really think you have

> it that bad, so just be quiet' among the objectors

> that I find unsettling.

it was also a group for women and non cis men etc as on their website

"Black Lives Matter affirms the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, black-undocumented folks, folks with records, women and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. It centers those that have been marginalized within Black liberation movements. It is a tactic to (re)build the Black liberation movement."

http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

[red devil]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I understand completely people sharing things on

> social media about BLM, and I am pleased to have

> read some very good posts from people on the

> subject.

>

> But in terms of adopting the movement here, I have

> to agree that it's badly thought out.

In a world of social media and 'like' button pressing, I kinda 'liked' that they had a good old fashioned sit down protest, in keeping with the roots of the Suffragettes/Civil Rights movements...

[civilservant]

my challenge not aimed at you, rh. thanks also for looking up the stats!

re loz's posts - yes, maybe men are arrested/convicted/sentenced/jailed more frequently than women, but this thread is about racial/ethnic disproportion. gender disproportion is a whole different kettle of fish, and yes, women are jailed less frequently than men, but if you're so keen on exploring that, we can start a dedicated thread

disproportionate prison numbers - I wasn't intending to compare directly with BLM. but I was pointing out that we have enough issues in this country to build a case about racial disproportion. but fortunately not as stark as in the US

[DaveR]

Also, to add, that there are lots of people and groups in the UK who have been working tirelessly for many years to address issues concerning racial prejudice in policing and the courts, compared to whom the UK version of BLM look very much like a bunch of kids who think (as kids do) that only they know and/or care about stuff, like passionately, y'know?

[LondonMix]

Ok Loz, please explain the relevance you see in posting statistics about men in a discussion of BLM. I'm having a hard time grasping the point you were trying to make.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Are you saying that until all social issues are

> resolved that impact all groups, black

> > people have no right to advocate for changes

> specifically impacting their community?

> > Why does that make sense to you?

>

> No, I didn't say that at all. But I assume you

> must have known that, as you didn't quote anything

> I've written that comes anywhere close to saying

> that.

>

> Why are you putting words in people's mouths and

> setting up nonsensical strawmen?

[LondonMix]

I've never said anything one way or another about the UK movement. I've not responded to comments about the UK movement only the U.S.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "I'm really not sure what riles so many on this

> thread about the movement. Why can't the black

> community in your view come together in protest

> against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an

> under current of 'we don't really think you have

> it that bad, so just be quiet' among the objectors

> that I find unsettling."

>

> Is the BLM movement in the UK protesting about

> unarmed shootings in the US (in which case why are

> they blockading Heathrow instead of marching to

> the US embassy) or are they concerned about

> unarmed shootings in the UK (in which case, by any

> sensible comparison this is a vanishingly small

> problem, and there are better targets for their

> energy)

>

> I am sympathetic to any campaign to eradicate

> prejudice, especially from the law

> enforcement/criminal justice system, but I don't

> buy this.

[LondonMix]

I read the entire thread and what you wrote. Please, correct me if I'm wrong but it read to me as if you were essentially saying that as the rate of shootings is less than the proportion of the prison population, that's evidence of no specific racial bias in the way the criminal justice system treats black people. If that was not the point of those stats please tell me what was.

My point is that's uniformed nonsense. I think if anyone is going to try to argue there is a lack of racial bias in the U.S. they should know something about the issues that have been heavily debated in congress including the repeal of certain laws found to have significant bias.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > If you really care, educate yourself about the

> issues you are raising. If you don't really have

> > the time or inclination to do a deep dive into

> the political issues at hand (which is totally

> > understandable), stop criticizing something you

> don't actually know much about.

>

> 1) Please read the whole thread before picking out

> one comment, as you don't seem to have followed

> the context in which it was written. There was a

> whole conversation around that post and stats.

> Read the previous posts and you will see the

> context of why those stats are in that post. And

> especially read the first line of my post.

>

> 2) Don't use the term 'educate yourself'. It is

> only used by pompous idiots who think their view

> on a subject is the only acceptable view, and I

> doubt you want people to think that of you.

[LondonMix]

I intentionally didn't say anyone in particular said that. However, comments like 'Billy isn't the only one not getting his food...' and the seeming questioning of the existence of racial bias in the US as arguments against the BLM do come across that way to me.

Like I said it feels like a combination of two arguments taking aim at the legitimacy of the BLM: 1). other people (including men and Billy) have it worse particularly when looking at proportional stats, and 2). looking at certain stats, its not clear there is any real bias at all.

Maybe that's not what e people are trying to put across but that's how it comes across to me.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I'm really not sure what riles so many on this

> > thread about the movement. Why can't the black

> > community in your view come together in protest

> > against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an

> > under current of 'we don't really think you

> have

> > it that bad, so just be quiet' among the

> objectors

> > that I find unsettling.

>

>

>

> That's kind of putting words in to people's mouths

> LM.

>

> I would likely support a BLM movement with a clear

> purpose (I say likely because I'd want to know

> what the clear purpose was). But when I saw those

> people blocking the road to Heathrow, I just

> thought "do you even know why you're doing this?".

[miga]

In fairness - the thread seems to have been started in reaction to the BLM protest at Heathrow, and should maybe have been entitled - "the applicability of BLM to the UK".

[rendelharris]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In fairness - the thread seems to have been

> started in reaction to the BLM protest at

> Heathrow, and should maybe have been entitled -

> "the applicability of BLM to the UK".

Yes, I think there's rather a lot of talking at cross purposes going on here, with some thinking that questioning the purpose of BLM UK equates to questioning BLM USA.

[Otta]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I intentionally didn't say anyone in particular

> said that. However, comments like 'Billy isn't the

> only one not getting his food...' and the seeming

> questioning of the existence of racial bias in the

> US as arguments against the BLM do come across

> that way to me.

>

> Like I said it feels like a combination of two

> arguments taking aim at the legitimacy of the BLM:

> 1). other people (including men and Billy) have it

> worse particularly when looking at proportional

> stats, and 2). looking at certain stats, its not

> clear there is any real bias at all.

>

> Maybe that's not what e people are trying to put

> across but that's how it comes across to me.

>

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > LondonMix Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > I'm really not sure what riles so many on

> this

> > > thread about the movement. Why can't the

> black

> > > community in your view come together in

> protest

> > > against unarmed shootings? There seems to be

> an

> > > under current of 'we don't really think you

> > have

> > > it that bad, so just be quiet' among the

> > objectors

> > > that I find unsettling.

> >

> >

> >

> > That's kind of putting words in to people's

> mouths

> > LM.

> >

> > I would likely support a BLM movement with a

> clear

> > purpose (I say likely because I'd want to know

> > what the clear purpose was). But when I saw

> those

> > people blocking the road to Heathrow, I just

> > thought "do you even know why you're doing

> this?".

I think our wires were crossed. You said above to DaveR that you've been talking specifically about the U.S. Movement (which I am all for). My post was about the attempts to duplicate it here, which I think are not well thought out or organised.

[LondonMix]

Okay fair enough. I don't know enough about the UK movement or UK racial politics and history to have a strong opinion on that.

[LondonMix]

I should add, its not that I know nothing-- I actually am a volunteer in the Southwark youth justice system dealing with young people on referral orders. However, despite living here for 11 years and my experience in the justice system, I get the sense that in the UK racial and class politics are even more complex than in the US.

For instance, white working class males have the worst academic performance of all socio-economic groups in this country. Despite whatever racial biases exist in the justice system and other state institutions, race privilege seems much more nuanced and complex in the UK, intersecting with other forms of identity.

I still don't feel I've gotten to grips with it entirely which is why I'm refraining from joining in the fray regarding opinions on the UK BLM movement.

[Loz]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I read the entire thread and what you wrote. Please, correct me if I'm wrong but it read to me

> as if you were essentially saying that as the rate of shootings is less than the proportion of the

> prison population, that's evidence of no specific racial bias in the way the criminal justice system

> treats black people. If that was not the point of those stats please tell me what was.

Did you read Blah Blah's post before mine? Is it not obvious then why those stats were posted? And even ore obvious when you read the first line of my post that your strange conclusion is a bit, well... strange? I admit that my reasons for posting the male stats was rather more opaque and esoteric, but those prison stats were pretty obvious.

It's curious that you've made wild, random mental leaps to try and understand what I am thinking, when possibly the only post of mine you haven't quoted and queried explains that pretty concisely. As a clue, that post exists because someone asked nicely what my thoughts were, rather than taking your current approach of blundering in and making all sorts of wild accusations. You are coming across as more than a little unwilling to stop, see, understand and accept/debate other people viewpoints and, by extension, you are really not doing BLM any favours.

[LondonMix]

Fine Loz-- I've asked you twice to explain what your point was in both posts and instead all you do is continue to insult me for assuming what you mean rather than explaining what you actually meant (if its different).

Either tell me or don't. Its up to you of course but stop accusing me of not trying to engage with you to clarify your thoughts.

Also, Blah Blah responded to your point about men suggesting men commit most of the crime and suggested the rate of black deaths was disproportionate and therefore a sign of bias. You brought in the suggestion that ethnicity was also proportionate and therefore... (what exactly was the point?)

Anyhow, the rate of police shootings of unarmed black people is highly disproportionate (5 times as likely as unarmed white individuals). This point was later made by other posters who provided links so I won't belabor it now.

[LondonMix]

And here is the quote since you keep saying, I'm not quoting you....

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blah Blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > And I wonder what percentage of crime

> (especially violent crime) is carried out by men?

> There's

> > probably a correlation there Loz.

>

> And if you do the same exercise with ethnicity in

> the US?

[miga]

Pollyanna here again. I think both LM and Loz have valid points.

I completely agree with LM's earlier point that BLM doesn't need to have any other agenda apart from the B bit, since there is a specific issue that they're addressing (spinning out of a context of huge disadvantage as it does). Stats aside, there's been a spate of innocent black people killed by the cops in the States in the last couple of years. That's not debatable.

I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that any broadly based social justice movement will have inconsistencies and imperfections and logical flaws.

But, these kinds of movements sometimes change society for the better - if as a result of this campaign American cops stop barge-arsing people around and become more accountable, everybody wins.

Further, and this doesn't invalidate any criticism of the movement, in my view it's sometimes worth noting who's criticising the BLM movement, and thinking about whether you'd like to align yourself with those people.

[Loz]

You have all the necessary information, LM, but just can't piece it together.

BB posted a query about the original stat that I posted and suggest there was a correlation, so I asked BB to apply it to another stat - one that I believed that BB would accept more unquestioningly. The point being to show that the correlation BB was suggesting was not valid and show this by applying it to a different stat. BB then put forward a related stat so I posted the stats to show that wasn't actually correct. My entire point from the start was even if the correlation did exist, it would not necessarily show causation anyway. Yet - and rather ironically - you read it as if I was providing it as 'evidence' of whatever it was you had decided to get you knickers in a twist about.

Whilst I agree that understanding the finer points of that wasn't terribly easy, coming to the conclusions you managed to make was really rather ridiculous. You somehow made "2 + 2 = fish". Loudly.

As further information (though with the associated danger that you will misconstrue this just as badly), the 'male prison rates' stat is interesting. As civilservant agreed, there is a significant bias in the justice system against men... but there is also studies to show men commit more crimes than women. So what does the 93% male prison population conclude?? On its own, absolutely nothing. You can't make the stat show causation - and this is important - for EITHER argument. It can signal that there may be a problem with bias or discrimination, but you have to dig further to find additional evidence to make any claim.

We had good debate in here until you came in. You are more than welcome to join in, but stop putting words in people's mouths - it is offensive. Constantly screaming highly random versions of "SO YOU THINK THIS" is tiresome and, yes, gets my back up. If you ask - nicely - for clarification, you will get it. If you jump up and down like a little child you will be treated accordingly.

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And here is the quote since you keep saying, I'm

> not quoting you....

>

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Blah Blah Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > And I wonder what percentage of crime

> > (especially violent crime) is carried out by

> men?

> > There's

> > > probably a correlation there Loz.

> >

> > And if you do the same exercise with ethnicity

> in

> > the US?