On the face of it BLM (Black Lives Matter) is only three words and the vast majority of people would agree with them. However I do wonder if many of the people chanting "Black Lives Matter" or carrying a placard displaying BLM have bothered to research what BLM actually means.
BLM was formed as a hashtag in 2013 by three US based Marxists-Leninist revolutionaries. Their icon is Black Liberation Army member Assata Shakur. Shakur fled to Cuba after being convicted of the murder she committed when her car was stopped for a minor traffic infringement by two New Jersey police officers. Without any warning, Shakur shot trooper Werner Foerster and then whilst he lying wounded on the ground pleading for his life she walked over and executed him.
BLM came to prominence in 2014-15 when it declared war on the police in the USA. It targeted integrated and even majority minority police forces. BLM isn't particularly concerned about individual injustices, but rather the alleged injustice of capitalism and 'white supremacy'. Nor is BLM particularly concerned about saving black lives. They draw no attention to.. or protest against .... black on black murders or the killing of black police officers.
BLM obtains its power from its exploitation of the ideology of oppression - identity politics. One of their key chants is "We have nothing to lose but our chains". Which comes directly from the Communist Manifesto. They demand the dissolution of the police with the objective of creating chaos and anarchy. Such an environment will provide them with the opportunity create a revolution and seize power.
I suspect if the majority of protestors were to be asked what they believed BLM meant they would claim their objective was to stop the police killing black people, rather than stating they subscribed to a complex leftist manifesto.
They have been intellectually hijacked!
4 comments :
Come on, Tom. If anyone has been intellectually hijacked, it is you.
You are comfortable to state that all of the people who have protested about the systemic racism of the US policing institutions are doing so because they don't realise that the BLM movement was started by 3 people with communist ideals.
David and I have donated to BLM recently, not because we are communists, but because we believe that black lives do matter and should be seen to matter and should be treated as mattering. Not because other lives don't matter, but because it is time for the US to start having black lives matter.
That communist reds under the bed crap is the same crap that health insurers and republicans spout about the ObamaCare and socialised medicine, and their insane fear about the word socialism.
Trade Unions were started by leftists, as were women's suffrage, the civil rights movement and gay rights movements - you are old enough to know that change doesn't occur simply by asking nicely to be awarded your human rights.
If you want to know what BLM stands for now, then read their manifesto - I did and decided to donate. I also bought a couple of books they suggested people read if they want to find out how to be an effective ally in their cause of making sure black lives matter. And how to address our own unconscious or conscious bias.
Cheers, Marilyn
Hi Marilyn
If you want to sooth your affluent white upper-middle class conscious by donating to a radical leftist organisation then I can't stop you. However the old "shut him up with accusations of reds under the bed" won't work with me. :-)
I too have read their UK manifesto. Did you miss the piece “We’re guided by a commitment to dismantle imperialism, capitalism, white-supremacy, patriarchy and the state structures that disproportionately harm black people in Britain and around the world.” https://sdp.org.uk/sdptalk/black-lives-matter-how-should-we-respond/
Perhaps you didn't listen to UK Talk Radio when the interviewer asked the BLM organiser about acts of violence on the part of London protestors. His answer was enlightening. There were no violent protestors. They were all peaceful. It was the police who were violent!
Cheers
Tom
I read their US manifesto before I donated to the US group.
I certainly noticed a different mood in the UK protests to those in the US - and I am not sure why that is really. It would be too easy to lay it all at BLM's feet though. I remember the looting that occurred a few years back during protests in London and almost all of the people filmed were white.
The reds under the bed was a reference to the original founders of BLM being leftists - as you know that label was used extensively in the US to scare people away from working/voting towards Democrat part ideals. Now the bogey word there is 'socialist'- used with the same purpose.
Regardless of nomenclature, regardless of who started the organisation, I truly would prefer to see a world where all people are valued and no one has to be in fear of their life when the police arrive. And I am sure you would too.
I can't find the US BLM manifesto and would appreciate it if you could forward me the link.
I'm not sure why you raised the subject of looting? I didn't! However I would agree that whenever there is large scale violent protest in the streets it is accompanied by looting.
Interesting you use socialist as a bogie word. The World Socialists don't see BLM as a kindred spirit. Actually they are rather scathing of them. See this rather interesting article on the World Socialist Website www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/04/blm-a04.html
Did you know each of the three founding members of BLM has an estimated net worth between $1-5M and list their primary profession as activist. Great money if you can find the right cause!
Approximately 150 police are killed in the USA every year. Compare that to NZ where 29 have been killed since the service was established back in the 19th century. No doubt the American cultural attitude towards gun ownership is a major contributing factor. However it does mean that in the US every contact a policeman has may result in a lethal confrontation. George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks should not have been killed. And they wouldn't have been; except they resisted arrest. It could be argued Rayshard Brooks didn't need to be chased when he ran off because the police had his car and they would be able to subsequently find him. However that ignores the fact Brooks had take one police officers weapon. I can imagine the furor against the police if it had been subsequently used during a crime.
You may recall several days prior to Brooks' death the Atlanta police pulled a black couple from their car before Tazering the male and handcuffing both of them. It was reported the couple were not resisting, but they did refuse to get out of the vehicle. The six officer involved face criminal charges. Five of them are Black! The media generally didn't report that.
I tend to the position this isn't an issue about black or racism, but more about the inequality between the 'haves and have nots'.
Marilyn
I can't find the US BLM manifesto and would appreciate it if you could forward me the link.
I'm not sure why you raised the subject of looting? I didn't! However I would agree that whenever there is large scale violent protest in the streets it is accompanied by looting.
Interesting you use socialist as a bogie word. The World Socialists don't see BLM as a kindred spirit. Actually they are rather scathing of them. See this rather interesting article on the World Socialist Website www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/04/blm-a04.html
Did you know each of the three founding members of BLM has an estimated net worth between $1-5M and list their primary profession as activist. Great money if you can find the right cause!
Approximately 150 police are killed in the USA every year. Compare that to NZ where 29 have been killed since the service was established back in the 19th century. No doubt the American cultural attitude towards gun ownership is a major contributing factor. However it does mean that in the US every contact a policeman has may result in a lethal confrontation. George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks should not have been killed. And they wouldn't have been; except they resisted arrest. It could be argued Rayshard Brooks didn't need to be chased when he ran off because the police had his car and they would be able to subsequently find him. However that ignores the fact Brooks had take one police officers weapon. I can imagine the furor against the police if it had been subsequently used during a crime.
You may recall several days prior to Brooks' death the Atlanta police pulled a black couple from their car before Tazering the male and handcuffing both of them. It was reported the couple were not resisting, but they did refuse to get out of the vehicle. The six officer involved face criminal charges. Five of them are Black! The media generally didn't report that.
I tend to the position this isn't an issue about black or racism, but more about the inequality between the 'haves and have nots'.
Post a Comment