I think I need slightly better confirmation of identification before I’m outraged at that.
The holiday was in 2020, but that typically misleading headline is all most will read.
So? She still flew there. She drives a car too.
I heard she eats food too and actually breathes.
Disgrace.
It’s hypocritical. Bang on about climate change yet fly and drive a car.
What a terrible argument.
You can be against climate change and the major issues facing the world without living like a monk unable to participate in society.
E fucking Zackley! I drive (an EV), fly when I have too, but do other things to offset that, be that less meat, use less power at home, or offset in other ways.
The world isn’t binary, as some climate change deniers insist
I don't fly (havent since around 2002), I share a relatively green motor with the Mrs that we only use some evenings and at weekends. We do buy quite a bit of produce now we're back in the UK, but always look for the tractor symbol (for a few reasons, not solely environmental). We do buy meat from butcher, but recently went halves with father in law for whole lamb that his friend brought on (total food miles was probably about 50 miles). Father in law also drive about a mile and a half to the Newhaven fish market and gets a load of seafood that we also get a fair share of too. I get given quite a bit of game too from friends, and once I've built up some private permissions again in the UK, I'll harvest lot more of our meat from there too, as I have done for years. Admittedly, the choices above aren't all directly relating to the environment on my part, although the Mrs is definitely more that way inclined.
I don't deny climate change, but I do completely disagree with JSO and their tactics.
Also reckon it would be interesting to know whose carbon footprint is bigger out of those on either side of the JSO protests, even if the choices are subconscious
I'll tell you whose carbon footprint is bigger....major international corporations and the governments.
Individual carbon footprint pales in comparison and it's dumb to start playing those games.
Playing what games? I think it's s fair point to make when I'm questioning JSOs futile protests
If it's governments and international corporations making the biggest impact, target them as some of us have been saying since page 1 of this thread. It would probably be easier to disrupt them than what it is the public
Trying to rubbish whole movements because the Daily Mail will pick on one or two members.
Happened exactly the same to turn BLM into some marxist conspiracy. It's just a way for people to maintain the status quo and keep heading into oblivion.
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
Mind you they did achieve quite a lot though:
1. Lots more dead black people, killed during riots, sorry, joyful expressions of community freedom, and in the 'cop free zones' where folk were free to murder each other with impunity.
2. Some nice Big Large Mansions for those in charge of an emotional corporate blackmail scam and their friends and relatives (although for poor and struggling black folk, not so much)
3. Most importantly, lots of virtue signalling points to those who desperately need attention and validation, for very little effort.
Luckily, those with a bit more sense saw through the whole shitshow from the start.
So, forgive us if we roll our eyes at the latest virtue signalling orgy, as usual, led by narcissists of limited intellect and self-righteous fury.
Interesting discourse on BLM. Can you point me in the direction of your evidence?
Not a big fan of Mark Steels podcast but an interesting take by Caroline Lucas on the benefits and costs to us of opening new mines and drilling more oil fields
That is an awesome post and bang on the money as usual. Get ready to be called a racist. FWIW we are on Tea break at work and i have logged in and read it out to my colleagues.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
So, the movement appealed for funds by guilt tripping the gullible and self-hating, got them and then embezzled them.
They advocated for 'defunding the police', got their wish and got more black people killed.
But apart from that, 'nothing to see here'.
So, no refutation of the factual points, just a broken record response 'wah, Daily Mail!'.
Plus, none of the above quotes are actually from the Daily Mail.
Honestly, debating with some of the erm (with a few notable exceptions), self titled 'progressives' hereabouts is like trying to reason with a Cornish pasty....except a Cornish pasty has superior skills in logic and reasoning and does not display such an overbearing sense of moral superiority.
That is an awesome post and bang on the money as usual. Get ready to be called a racist. FWIW we are on Tea break at work and i have logged in and read it out to my colleagues.
That is an awesome post and bang on the money as usual. Get ready to be called a racist. FWIW we are on Tea break at work and i have logged in and read it out to my colleagues.
They want you as prime minister.
Why thank you, not that I'd want the job - imagine trying to sort out the mess that this country has become. Good luck Mr Starmer, you're going to need it!
As for being called racist, it is interesting that the word has lost its power due to overuse and the habit of those who do use it as an insult do so as a knee jerk response in lieu of actual intelligent thought. I have no time for thick or dishonest people and don't care what they think.
As to being insulted by such types hereabouts, it is water off a duck's back. I would have to respect someone's point of view to care about their opinions and so many progressives (as I said, with a few notable exceptions) on CL lack the ability to think for themselves or apply logic, or only do so to virtue signal and seek self-validation by others that I can only pity them really.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
The above relates to a deal with Warner bros that enabled Patrisse Cullors to buy property. If it was so secret how come we all know about it. There is no evidence provided in that link that she used charitable donations to purchase the property. Furthemore somebody is calling for an investigation, nor is there evidence that Patrisse Cullors has pretended to give the Warner bros money to charity.
This relates to charitable money donated to family members for doing apparently sweet FA.
This link ends by saying this: 'Patrisse Cullors, who stepped down as the foundation's executive director in May last year, did not take any financial compensation for her work in the organization, the filing showed.'
This link leads on the reduction of killings by the police, but does not seem to talk about a particular area. It says that the murder rate has increased in areas that there were BLM protests without any definition of those areas. Travis Campbell whose researched is cited does not encompass the 'George Floyds' summer, is not peer reviewed and if you read the whole article is says there are a huge number of flaws in the methodology used.
As shown in the above, amazingly (at least to those on the left), more people get murdered when you get rid of the police. Who'd a thunk it, eh?
What you have supplied seems to me about as convincing and plausible as the evidence Blair cited (a student thesis) that there were weapons of mass destruction poised to wipe out the UK in 40 minutes, and we now know the truth about that.
Very tellingly the first link contains this little nugget:
But Cullors recently purchased a $1.4 million home in Topanga Canyon, California, with a white population of 88.2% and a black population of 0.4%, according to the 2010 census.Not exactly the ‘hood.
Have you any idea why the information about the colour of the skin of a house purchaser is mentioned alongside the colour of the skin of the majority of the new neighbours?
You mentioned that your search was cursory, you're right about that.
I accept that in some enterprises that raise money, like with the Captain Tom charity that questions need to be asked. However this is how you framed your complaint:
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
It is a valid opinion because it is your opinion. But isn't that just what it is, an opinion about Black Lives Matter?
I think I need slightly better confirmation of identification before I’m outraged at that.
The holiday was in 2020, but that typically misleading headline is all most will read.
So? She still flew there. She drives a car too.
I heard she eats food too and actually breathes.
Disgrace.
It’s hypocritical. Bang on about climate change yet fly and drive a car.
What a terrible argument.
You can be against climate change and the major issues facing the world without living like a monk unable to participate in society.
E fucking Zackley! I drive (an EV), fly when I have too, but do other things to offset that, be that less meat, use less power at home, or offset in other ways.
The world isn’t binary, as some climate change deniers insist
I don't fly (havent since around 2002), I share a relatively green motor with the Mrs that we only use some evenings and at weekends. We do buy quite a bit of produce now we're back in the UK, but always look for the tractor symbol (for a few reasons, not solely environmental). We do buy meat from butcher, but recently went halves with father in law for whole lamb that his friend brought on (total food miles was probably about 50 miles). Father in law also drive about a mile and a half to the Newhaven fish market and gets a load of seafood that we also get a fair share of too. I get given quite a bit of game too from friends, and once I've built up some private permissions again in the UK, I'll harvest lot more of our meat from there too, as I have done for years. Admittedly, the choices above aren't all directly relating to the environment on my part, although the Mrs is definitely more that way inclined.
I don't deny climate change, but I do completely disagree with JSO and their tactics.
Also reckon it would be interesting to know whose carbon footprint is bigger out of those on either side of the JSO protests, even if the choices are subconscious
I'll tell you whose carbon footprint is bigger....major international corporations and the governments.
Individual carbon footprint pales in comparison and it's dumb to start playing those games.
Playing what games? I think it's s fair point to make when I'm questioning JSOs futile protests
If it's governments and international corporations making the biggest impact, target them as some of us have been saying since page 1 of this thread. It would probably be easier to disrupt them than what it is the public
Trying to rubbish whole movements because the Daily Mail will pick on one or two members.
Happened exactly the same to turn BLM into some marxist conspiracy. It's just a way for people to maintain the status quo and keep heading into oblivion.
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
Mind you they did achieve quite a lot though:
1. Lots more dead black people, killed during riots, sorry, joyful expressions of community freedom, and in the 'cop free zones' where folk were free to murder each other with impunity.
2. Some nice Big Large Mansions for those in charge of an emotional corporate blackmail scam and their friends and relatives (although for poor and struggling black folk, not so much)
3. Most importantly, lots of virtue signalling points to those who desperately need attention and validation, for very little effort.
Luckily, those with a bit more sense saw through the whole shitshow from the start.
So, forgive us if we roll our eyes at the latest virtue signalling orgy, as usual, led by narcissists of limited intellect and self-righteous fury.
Interesting discourse on BLM. Can you point me in the direction of your evidence?
I think I need slightly better confirmation of identification before I’m outraged at that.
The holiday was in 2020, but that typically misleading headline is all most will read.
So? She still flew there. She drives a car too.
I heard she eats food too and actually breathes.
Disgrace.
It’s hypocritical. Bang on about climate change yet fly and drive a car.
What a terrible argument.
You can be against climate change and the major issues facing the world without living like a monk unable to participate in society.
E fucking Zackley! I drive (an EV), fly when I have too, but do other things to offset that, be that less meat, use less power at home, or offset in other ways.
The world isn’t binary, as some climate change deniers insist
I don't fly (havent since around 2002), I share a relatively green motor with the Mrs that we only use some evenings and at weekends. We do buy quite a bit of produce now we're back in the UK, but always look for the tractor symbol (for a few reasons, not solely environmental). We do buy meat from butcher, but recently went halves with father in law for whole lamb that his friend brought on (total food miles was probably about 50 miles). Father in law also drive about a mile and a half to the Newhaven fish market and gets a load of seafood that we also get a fair share of too. I get given quite a bit of game too from friends, and once I've built up some private permissions again in the UK, I'll harvest lot more of our meat from there too, as I have done for years. Admittedly, the choices above aren't all directly relating to the environment on my part, although the Mrs is definitely more that way inclined.
I don't deny climate change, but I do completely disagree with JSO and their tactics.
Also reckon it would be interesting to know whose carbon footprint is bigger out of those on either side of the JSO protests, even if the choices are subconscious
I'll tell you whose carbon footprint is bigger....major international corporations and the governments.
Individual carbon footprint pales in comparison and it's dumb to start playing those games.
Playing what games? I think it's s fair point to make when I'm questioning JSOs futile protests
If it's governments and international corporations making the biggest impact, target them as some of us have been saying since page 1 of this thread. It would probably be easier to disrupt them than what it is the public
Trying to rubbish whole movements because the Daily Mail will pick on one or two members.
Happened exactly the same to turn BLM into some marxist conspiracy. It's just a way for people to maintain the status quo and keep heading into oblivion.
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
Mind you they did achieve quite a lot though:
1. Lots more dead black people, killed during riots, sorry, joyful expressions of community freedom, and in the 'cop free zones' where folk were free to murder each other with impunity.
2. Some nice Big Large Mansions for those in charge of an emotional corporate blackmail scam and their friends and relatives (although for poor and struggling black folk, not so much)
3. Most importantly, lots of virtue signalling points to those who desperately need attention and validation, for very little effort.
Luckily, those with a bit more sense saw through the whole shitshow from the start.
So, forgive us if we roll our eyes at the latest virtue signalling orgy, as usual, led by narcissists of limited intellect and self-righteous fury.
Interesting discourse on BLM. Can you point me in the direction of your evidence?
Going for the Troll of the year award?
Why is that? Is requesting evidence wrong or something?
That is pretty naughty from Cullors in some of the payments made to people she knows. I'll be treating her with suspicion going forward because though she apparently didn't take any money from the $90m received in donations (as per the Business Insider source quoted by BS), I don't think she is totally above board.
But, like, the property? This is a woman buying a house at about the median price for the area in which she lives - California, which is notoriously expensive (the median in San Francisco for a property of any kind is $1.4m)
If I were to suddenly "buy a £1m house" or whatever then, well... who would care? This is a bit of a hit piece. And the line about "not exactly the 'hood" - well what is that meant to mean? Are you not allowed to buy a house somewhere else? Do all black people have to stay in "the 'hood"? Genuinely, what does it mean?
------------------------------------------
What I would say, is that the Black Lives Matter Movement (note the capital M on Movement) - founded by Cullors; Garza; and Tometi - is different to the sentiment and to the wider decentralised social movement. I feel that @bigstemarra - because he is a clever bloke, who I believe also likes to stir the pot a bit - has quite cleverly conflated the two in his derailment of this thread.
Re musings on "more dead black people" - I don't think the report re the Seattle CHOP zone is of great statistical significance: this documents a 24-day "occupation" where police did not patrol at all. HOWEVER it is obvious that fewer police = more crime. No doubt. And I am no advocate for getting rid of law enforcement and I don't think many serious lefties are, unless you can provide a source for this please bigstemarra.
Where in your source is it mentioned that - I quote - "folk were free to murder each other with impunity"? I Ctrl+F'ed on the CrimRXIV link both "murder" and "homicide", and found no reference to this happening in the CHOP, though there were of course accurate studies cited that - as you say - demonstrate fewer police = more crime (including murder of course) (NB this is true of all ethnic demographics).
Also, what is this "black community" to which bigstemarra refers? If I referred to "the white community", are (for instance) the white people of Blackpool and the white people of Primrose Hill all in that "community"?
-----------
I really enjoyed that Vox piece - thank you for sharing it @bigstemarra - as it's actually quite nuanced. Your framing of the issue is, again, characteristically clever and misleading. Where there are fewer incidences of lethal use of force by police, murder rates go up. Not "fewer police". This is an important distinction.
The reasoning for this ends up being quite nuanced: are criminals more emboldened? Could it be because people see the police as delegitimised after scrutiny re their actions? It's a massive question and neither I nor that study can really answer it comprehensively.
-----------
Personally, I think that when it comes to the States, the issue with policing is NOT that there are too many police officers, but moreso that they are funded in lieu of funding community schemes like we have in the UK, so have the burden of acting as social services - to varying extents state by state - which they are completely not right for.
Coupled with the genuine issues from what appear to be too many bad eggs in the system - look at Daniel Shaver (a white guy!) or George Floyd or whoever else - and I think that the US police landscape is in dire need of reform.
Defund the police works as a slogan in the US. It definitely DOESN'T in the UK, because it means something totally different.
-----------
So, like, why is wanting there to be less police brutality "virtue signalling"?
Think this has gone for biggest diversion of the year from OP award... wasn't this about oil protests and environmental concerns?
You not new here @Jonniesta! Should know better by now 😉 Don't worry, I'm sure the actions of JSO will soon have us back on track, if they aren't stuck to it.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
The above relates to a deal with Warner bros that enabled Patrisse Cullors to buy property. If it was so secret how come we all know about it. There is no evidence provided in that link that she used charitable donations to purchase the property. Furthemore somebody is calling for an investigation, nor is there evidence that Patrisse Cullors has pretended to give the Warner bros money to charity.
This relates to charitable money donated to family members for doing apparently sweet FA.
This link ends by saying this: 'Patrisse Cullors, who stepped down as the foundation's executive director in May last year, did not take any financial compensation for her work in the organization, the filing showed.'
This link leads on the reduction of killings by the police, but does not seem to talk about a particular area. It says that the murder rate has increased in areas that there were BLM protests without any definition of those areas. Travis Campbell whose researched is cited does not encompass the 'George Floyds' summer, is not peer reviewed and if you read the whole article is says there are a huge number of flaws in the methodology used.
As shown in the above, amazingly (at least to those on the left), more people get murdered when you get rid of the police. Who'd a thunk it, eh?
What you have supplied seems to me about as convincing and plausible as the evidence Blair cited (a student thesis) that there were weapons of mass destruction poised to wipe out the UK in 40 minutes, and we now know the truth about that.
Very tellingly the first link contains this little nugget:
But Cullors recently purchased a $1.4 million home in Topanga Canyon, California, with a white population of 88.2% and a black population of 0.4%, according to the 2010 census.Not exactly the ‘hood.
Have you any idea why the information about the colour of the skin of a house purchaser is mentioned alongside the colour of the skin of the majority of the new neighbours?
You mentioned that your search was cursory, you're right about that.
I accept that in some enterprises that raise money, like with the Captain Tom charity that questions need to be asked. However this is how you framed your complaint:
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
It is a valid opinion because it is your opinion. But isn't that just what it is, an opinion about Black Lives Matter?
The house she bought, was actually worth £6M, that is a fact, not an opinion:
The point about ethnicity is relevant, because you have someone who talks a lot about 'the black community'. As soon as she gets her hands on some money, she decides she wants to live around rich white folks. The above article is from The Independent, which is so pro-BLM, it could reasonably be considered biased, yet it still considers that she has questions to answer, as would any rational person.
You have leapt on a small aside regarding ethnicity, yet have failed to address any of the larger points (e.g the effects of 'defunding the police'). Somehow I am not surprised.
Here's the thing with stuff like this. Bigstemarra can post 3 quick links and I then spend a good 45 minutes writing a post to analyse them, or rebut them. And the conversation moves on.
He'll use powerful rhetoric to convince people that he is right. And it'll be deliberately ambiguous e.g. "BLM is a capitalist conspiracy", where he's referring to the organisation set up by Cullors et al. People will take this to mean that "the social movement that promotes black lives as mattering equally is a conspiracy", and BS won't deny that, or clarify it, I guess.
So, it's really clever stuff to be fair. I'm going to continue to disagree and respond where I can, though. But it's so hard to do this bit, when the easy bit of using florid language and posting "sources" from sites with agendas takes barely any time.
ME14 - All the lengthy posts pointing out what the government are/are not doing, and the multiple links to news stories. 1-2 people may be trying to argue against it, but I suspect the majority agree with what you’re saying.
But it seems like you’re continually missing the point that it’s not JSO mission that many are against, it’s the way they go about doing it.
You can post all the links educating people of the gravity of the situation. And like I said before, I actually prefer that approach to educating people to promote change. But everytime someone goes and glues themselves to the road or protests a wedding, then it actually takes the messaging back a couple of steps IMO. It reeks of ‘look at me’ attention seeking, and therefore people end up talking about them rather than talking about the cause.
Like it or not, JSO are not helping the situation whatsoever with what they’re doing. They’re just pissing people off, and potentially putting themselves/others in danger.
(And yes, I know it’s no comparison to the danger we face as a planet etc etc etc, before anyone wades in to say it)
Quite a few comments have been from people who still believe that man made Climate Change is a myth, so if just one of those has a rethink from what has been posted to counteract that idea, then it will have been worth it.
Can we change the thread title to "M14addick Soapbox'?
Here's the thing with stuff like this. Bigstemarra can post 3 quick links and I then spend a good 45 minutes writing a post to analyse them, or rebut them. And the conversation moves on.
He'll use powerful rhetoric to convince people that he is right. And it'll be deliberately ambiguous e.g. "BLM is a capitalist conspiracy", where he's referring to the organisation set up by Cullors et al. People will take this to mean that "the social movement that promotes black lives as mattering equally is a conspiracy", and BS won't deny that, or clarify it, I guess.
So, it's really clever stuff to be fair. I'm going to continue to disagree and respond where I can, though. But it's so hard to do this bit, when the easy bit of using florid language and posting "sources" from sites with agendas takes barely any time.
The same will happen to climate change protests.
They'll pick on a fringe organisation with a few dodgy members and use that to rubbish the entire movement. Happens every time there's a risk to the status quo.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
The above relates to a deal with Warner bros that enabled Patrisse Cullors to buy property. If it was so secret how come we all know about it. There is no evidence provided in that link that she used charitable donations to purchase the property. Furthemore somebody is calling for an investigation, nor is there evidence that Patrisse Cullors has pretended to give the Warner bros money to charity.
This relates to charitable money donated to family members for doing apparently sweet FA.
This link ends by saying this: 'Patrisse Cullors, who stepped down as the foundation's executive director in May last year, did not take any financial compensation for her work in the organization, the filing showed.'
This link leads on the reduction of killings by the police, but does not seem to talk about a particular area. It says that the murder rate has increased in areas that there were BLM protests without any definition of those areas. Travis Campbell whose researched is cited does not encompass the 'George Floyds' summer, is not peer reviewed and if you read the whole article is says there are a huge number of flaws in the methodology used.
As shown in the above, amazingly (at least to those on the left), more people get murdered when you get rid of the police. Who'd a thunk it, eh?
What you have supplied seems to me about as convincing and plausible as the evidence Blair cited (a student thesis) that there were weapons of mass destruction poised to wipe out the UK in 40 minutes, and we now know the truth about that.
Very tellingly the first link contains this little nugget:
But Cullors recently purchased a $1.4 million home in Topanga Canyon, California, with a white population of 88.2% and a black population of 0.4%, according to the 2010 census.Not exactly the ‘hood.
Have you any idea why the information about the colour of the skin of a house purchaser is mentioned alongside the colour of the skin of the majority of the new neighbours?
You mentioned that your search was cursory, you're right about that.
I accept that in some enterprises that raise money, like with the Captain Tom charity that questions need to be asked. However this is how you framed your complaint:
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
It is a valid opinion because it is your opinion. But isn't that just what it is, an opinion about Black Lives Matter?
The house she bought, was actually worth £6M, that is a fact, not an opinion:
The point about ethnicity is relevant, because you have someone who talks a lot about 'the black community'. As soon as she gets her hands on some money, she decides she wants to live around rich white folks. The above article is from The Independent, which is so pro-BLM, it could reasonably be considered biased, yet it still considers that she has questions to answer, as would any rational person.
You have leapt on a small aside regarding ethnicity, yet have failed to address any of the larger points (e.g the effects of 'defunding the police'). Somehow I am not surprised.
Seth, I've already had to re-explain things for you more than once because you don't read what is posted (or wilfully misunderstand, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt).
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
The above relates to a deal with Warner bros that enabled Patrisse Cullors to buy property. If it was so secret how come we all know about it. There is no evidence provided in that link that she used charitable donations to purchase the property. Furthemore somebody is calling for an investigation, nor is there evidence that Patrisse Cullors has pretended to give the Warner bros money to charity.
This relates to charitable money donated to family members for doing apparently sweet FA.
This link ends by saying this: 'Patrisse Cullors, who stepped down as the foundation's executive director in May last year, did not take any financial compensation for her work in the organization, the filing showed.'
This link leads on the reduction of killings by the police, but does not seem to talk about a particular area. It says that the murder rate has increased in areas that there were BLM protests without any definition of those areas. Travis Campbell whose researched is cited does not encompass the 'George Floyds' summer, is not peer reviewed and if you read the whole article is says there are a huge number of flaws in the methodology used.
As shown in the above, amazingly (at least to those on the left), more people get murdered when you get rid of the police. Who'd a thunk it, eh?
What you have supplied seems to me about as convincing and plausible as the evidence Blair cited (a student thesis) that there were weapons of mass destruction poised to wipe out the UK in 40 minutes, and we now know the truth about that.
Very tellingly the first link contains this little nugget:
But Cullors recently purchased a $1.4 million home in Topanga Canyon, California, with a white population of 88.2% and a black population of 0.4%, according to the 2010 census.Not exactly the ‘hood.
Have you any idea why the information about the colour of the skin of a house purchaser is mentioned alongside the colour of the skin of the majority of the new neighbours?
You mentioned that your search was cursory, you're right about that.
I accept that in some enterprises that raise money, like with the Captain Tom charity that questions need to be asked. However this is how you framed your complaint:
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
It is a valid opinion because it is your opinion. But isn't that just what it is, an opinion about Black Lives Matter?
The house she bought, was actually worth £6M, that is a fact, not an opinion:
The point about ethnicity is relevant, because you have someone who talks a lot about 'the black community'. As soon as she gets her hands on some money, she decides she wants to live around rich white folks. The above article is from The Independent, which is so pro-BLM, it could reasonably be considered biased, yet it still considers that she has questions to answer, as would any rational person.
You have leapt on a small aside regarding ethnicity, yet have failed to address any of the larger points (e.g the effects of 'defunding the police'). Somehow I am not surprised.
Let's agree to disagree, eh?
Is this house not a different house? I've had a look for sources to corroborate what you've said, but I can't find anything definitive either way. $1.4m to $6m are two different things, and I don't know if you've mistaken her buying her own home for BLMM buying this $6m "artist hangout" or whatever they're calling it.
That is an awesome post and bang on the money as usual. Get ready to be called a racist. FWIW we are on Tea break at work and i have logged in and read it out to my colleagues.
They want you as prime minister.
Why thank you, not that I'd want the job - imagine trying to sort out the mess that this country has become. Good luck Mr Starmer, you're going to need it!
As for being called racist, it is interesting that the word has lost its power due to overuse and the habit of those who do use it as an insult do so as a knee jerk response in lieu of actual intelligent thought. I have no time for thick or dishonest people and don't care what they think.
As to being insulted by such types hereabouts, it is water off a duck's back. I would have to respect someone's point of view to care about their opinions and so many progressives (as I said, with a few notable exceptions) on CL lack the ability to think for themselves or apply logic, or only do so to virtue signal and seek self-validation by others that I can only pity them really.
Its a bit late mate. I have my Chippy (no not me) making up the sandwich boards with your name on for next PM as we speak.
If Seth and Bigstem have agreed to disagree on BLM and the price of real estate then perhaps we could go back to JSO?
I came across this quote just today:
"The ********* are the largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil, they have no equivalent," says historian Dr Fern Riddell.
Before we fill in the missing word....it is my understanding that the JSO people are protesting against the Government continuing to issue licenses for fossil fuel extraction despite being committed to driving down carbon emissions by 2050 and they are continuing to give the green light to carry on extracting fossil fuels rather than investing more heavily in sustainable energy sources.
With temperatures around the world today reaching 50 degrees centigrade it seems likely that in 100 years time our descendants - if they indeed have survived until 2123 - will wonder what the hell we were doing to address the problem of Global Warming.
I chose the 100 years and 2123 deliberately. Looking back 100 years to 1913 there were protests in Britain around that time on a scale never seen before. The largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil was of course the Suffragettes.
They carried out acts of criminal damage which would make the JSO activists wince and yet100 years on we all now accept surely that women should have had the right to vote then and long before they finally achieved it in 1918.
If peaceful actions by JSO protestors (hardly terrorists) continue to highlight the issue of fossil fuel licensing then who knows, at some future date they might be viewed in the same light as the Suffragettes and if no one gets physically hurt then yes, it may be inconvenient, it may be annoying, it may be downright anti-social in some ways but it is short-term.
What is happening now to the Earth on which live is going to have a long-term effect on the planet from which it may indeed never recover unless urgent action is taken now.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a JSO activist or member of any political party.
That is pretty naughty from Cullors in some of the payments made to people she knows. I'll be treating her with suspicion going forward because though she apparently didn't take any money from the $90m received in donations (as per the Business Insider source quoted by BS), I don't think she is totally above board.
But, like, the property? This is a woman buying a house at about the median price for the area in which she lives - California, which is notoriously expensive (the median in San Francisco for a property of any kind is $1.4m)
If I were to suddenly "buy a £1m house" or whatever then, well... who would care? This is a bit of a hit piece. And the line about "not exactly the 'hood" - well what is that meant to mean? Are you not allowed to buy a house somewhere else? Do all black people have to stay in "the 'hood"? Genuinely, what does it mean?
------------------------------------------
What I would say, is that the Black Lives Matter Movement (note the capital M on Movement) - founded by Cullors; Garza; and Tometi - is different to the sentiment and to the wider decentralised social movement. I feel that @bigstemarra - because he is a clever bloke, who I believe also likes to stir the pot a bit - has quite cleverly conflated the two in his derailment of this thread.
Re musings on "more dead black people" - I don't think the report re the Seattle CHOP zone is of great statistical significance: this documents a 24-day "occupation" where police did not patrol at all. HOWEVER it is obvious that fewer police = more crime. No doubt. And I am no advocate for getting rid of law enforcement and I don't think many serious lefties are, unless you can provide a source for this please bigstemarra.
Where in your source is it mentioned that - I quote - "folk were free to murder each other with impunity"? I Ctrl+F'ed on the CrimRXIV link both "murder" and "homicide", and found no reference to this happening in the CHOP, though there were of course accurate studies cited that - as you say - demonstrate fewer police = more crime (including murder of course) (NB this is true of all ethnic demographics).
Also, what is this "black community" to which bigstemarra refers? If I referred to "the white community", are (for instance) the white people of Blackpool and the white people of Primrose Hill all in that "community"?
-----------
I really enjoyed that Vox piece - thank you for sharing it @bigstemarra - as it's actually quite nuanced. Your framing of the issue is, again, characteristically clever and misleading. Where there are fewer incidences of lethal use of force by police, murder rates go up. Not "fewer police". This is an important distinction.
The reasoning for this ends up being quite nuanced: are criminals more emboldened? Could it be because people see the police as delegitimised after scrutiny re their actions? It's a massive question and neither I nor that study can really answer it comprehensively.
-----------
Personally, I think that when it comes to the States, the issue with policing is NOT that there are too many police officers, but moreso that they are funded in lieu of funding community schemes like we have in the UK, so have the burden of acting as social services - to varying extents state by state - which they are completely not right for.
Coupled with the genuine issues from what appear to be too many bad eggs in the system - look at Daniel Shaver (a white guy!) or George Floyd or whoever else - and I think that the US police landscape is in dire need of reform.
Defund the police works as a slogan in the US. It definitely DOESN'T in the UK, because it means something totally different.
-----------
So, like, why is wanting there to be less police brutality "virtue signalling"?
Paddy, thank you for your intelligent, good-faith engagement.
In regard to Cullors, I refer you to the further piece posted above and her purchase of a £6M mansion, which she forgot to mention until someone found out. She is a con-artist, plain and simple.
Regarding the conflation of the BLM organisation and the movement, I take your point, but it is notable that this separation only started to occur when it became politically convenient; they are the same when it suits, and different when that is not convenient.
As regards the crime rate, I take on board that you do not advocate for defunding the police, but many do and it was one of the loudest calls of the BLM movement. Personally, I consider being allowed to set up your own armed road blocks in unpoliced zones as being 'free to murder with impunity':
Interestingly, as I pointed out at the time, the above was a headline dominating story in the US, but went unreported by the likes of the BBC, who chose to ignore anything that did not support their chosen BLM sympathetic, anti US police narrative. This was strange, because their coverage of BLM etc. was so enormous that you would have thought that George Floyd was murdered in the UK. You could also be forgiven for thinking the same when industrial scale virtue signalling occurred on the streets of this country too. Still, it's always amusing to watch some right on wally chanting 'don't shoot' at unarmed UK police officers, if nothing else.
This is just one CHOP zone study, and there are many others in cities such as Portland. Most of these have now been done away with, because they were total disasters for the local populace.
And yes, it is virtue signalling; not for wanting corrupt cops not to shoot minorities (or anyone for that matter), but for vapidly attaching oneself to a political movement in order to feed one's ego, e.g 'taking the knee' at football matches in arguably the world's least racist country (which achieves precisely nothing apart from boosting one's ego) instead of e.g donating money to causes attempting to address the underlying issues or doing volunteer work for those perceived to be victimised. There are people who I respect, even if I disagree with them, because they genuinely care about certain issues, but it is clear that many pretend to do, in order to gain praise and/or validation. Much of this is due to social media and the fear of ostracization, of course. I and many others find this tiresome, not least because the 'be kind' brigade are actually some of the most likely to encourage violence against those who disagree with them (c.f hate filled trans protestors banging on about 'love' one minute and dealing out violent misogynistic threats the next).
As for 'the black community', I take your point, but it is the identity politics movement that insisted that we should all see ourselves as belonging to one group or another, because only then can the pyramid of victimhood be established. For instance, we are told that we must have this rather peculiar display of annual narcissism that is 'Pride' to celebrate the LGBT etc. community, even though most gay people I know can't stand it because it makes it mainly involves attention seekers that make them want to cringe. They abhor the idea of identifying themselves by one of the many aspects of their personality as it is just an incidental part of them. However, in the media, we are constantly given representatives (often self appointed) of certain communities, who are there to let us know the feelings of those communities as that is the way things appear to be done these days.
This is the world that the 'progressives' have made for and we now just live in it.
Anyway, having hideously gone off topic, I think that I should give it a rest. I'm even boring myself!
If Seth and Bigstem have agreed to disagree on BLM and the price of real estate then perhaps we could go back to JSO?
I came across this quote just today:
"The ********* are the largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil, they have no equivalent," says historian Dr Fern Riddell.
Before we fill in the missing word....it is my understanding that the JSO people are protesting against the Government continuing to issue licenses for fossil fuel extraction despite being committed to driving down carbon emissions by 2050 and they are continuing to give the green light to carry on extracting fossil fuels rather than investing more heavily in sustainable energy sources.
With temperatures around the world today reaching 50 degrees centigrade it seems likely that in 100 years time our descendants - if they indeed have survived until 2123 - will wonder what the hell we were doing to address the problem of Global Warming.
I chose the 100 years and 2123 deliberately. Looking back 100 years to 1913 there were protests in Britain around that time on a scale never seen before. The largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil was of course the Suffragettes.
They carried out acts of criminal damage which would make the JSO activists wince and yet100 years on we all now accept surely that women should have had the right to vote then and long before they finally achieved it in 1918.
If peaceful actions by JSO protestors (hardly terrorists) continue to highlight the issue of fossil fuel licensing then who knows, at some future date they might be viewed in the same light as the Suffragettes and if no one gets physically hurt then yes, it may be inconvenient, it may be annoying, it may be downright anti-social in some ways but it is short-term.
What is happening now to the Earth on which live is going to have a long-term effect on the planet from which it may indeed never recover unless urgent action is taken now.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a JSO activist or member of any political party.
I don't think women got voting equality with men in the UK until 1928. Less than a hundred years ago, and within living memory for more people than we may realise. The other day there was a piece on a woman who has lived in the same house she was born in for the last 105 years.
Thanks for the response. I'd like to think our correspondence here has been in good faith. I disagree immensely with a lot of what you've written there - naturally so, because I'm progressive. You won't see me shouting about it much and it's usually the minority with the loudest voices, no matter whether that is a progressive; conservative; socially liberal; or socially illiberal sect. (See also: religious figures)
Also, Secoreia Turner was murdered by the Bloods who'd set up a barricade, I believe, as part of an opportunistic attempt to win some sort of control over territory. I'd have thought that "local interest" would play a part in the situation - could you see Olivia Pratt-Korbel's tragic murder getting as much interest in the US, for instance?
I will leave this here for now until we engage probably on HoC, if I ever bother to post substantively there, as this isn't a derailment so much as a completely different mode of transport.
Comments
Can you point me in the direction of your evidence?
That is an awesome post and bang on the money as usual. Get ready to be called a racist. FWIW we are on Tea break at work and i have logged in and read it out to my colleagues.
They want you as prime minister.
But since you appear to live in a bubble, even though you clearly have the internet, here's a couple of pointers from a cursory search of the internet using something called Google. You should try it some time:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/04/15/black-lives-matter-co-founder-cashes-in-on-systemic-racism/
The above relates to them secretly buying property with the funds, then proceeding to pretend that they were going to use it for charitable purposes when they were found out.
https://www.businessinsider.com/black-lives-matter-tax-filing-cofounder-paid-800000-brother-security-2022-5?r=US&IR=T
This relates to charitable money donated to family members for doing apparently sweet FA.
https://www.crimrxiv.com/pub/n8lhb37h/release/1
https://www.vox.com/22360290/black-lives-matter-protest-crime-ferguson-effects-murder
As shown in the above, amazingly (at least to those on the left), more people get murdered when you get rid of the police. Who'd a thunk it, eh?
Thanks for proving my point
They advocated for 'defunding the police', got their wish and got more black people killed.
But apart from that, 'nothing to see here'.
So, no refutation of the factual points, just a broken record response 'wah, Daily Mail!'.
Plus, none of the above quotes are actually from the Daily Mail.
Honestly, debating with some of the erm (with a few notable exceptions), self titled 'progressives' hereabouts is like trying to reason with a Cornish pasty....except a Cornish pasty has superior skills in logic and reasoning and does not display such an overbearing sense of moral superiority.
As for being called racist, it is interesting that the word has lost its power due to overuse and the habit of those who do use it as an insult do so as a knee jerk response in lieu of actual intelligent thought. I have no time for thick or dishonest people and don't care what they think.
As to being insulted by such types hereabouts, it is water off a duck's back. I would have to respect someone's point of view to care about their opinions and so many progressives (as I said, with a few notable exceptions) on CL lack the ability to think for themselves or apply logic, or only do so to virtue signal and seek self-validation by others that I can only pity them really.
Very tellingly the first link contains this little nugget:
But Cullors recently purchased a $1.4 million home in Topanga Canyon, California, with a white population of 88.2% and a black population of 0.4%, according to the 2010 census. Not exactly the ‘hood.
Have you any idea why the information about the colour of the skin of a house purchaser is mentioned alongside the colour of the skin of the majority of the new neighbours?
You mentioned that your search was cursory, you're right about that.
I accept that in some enterprises that raise money, like with the Captain Tom charity that questions need to be asked. However this is how you framed your complaint:
Given that BLM actually turned out to be a capitalist conspiracy conceived to dupe money out of gullible, self-hating liberals, it's an eye-opener that you are prepared to go into bat for them, given that they are now despised for the grifters that they are by the majority of the black community.
It is a valid opinion because it is your opinion. But isn't that just what it is, an opinion about Black Lives Matter?
But, like, the property? This is a woman buying a house at about the median price for the area in which she lives - California, which is notoriously expensive (the median in San Francisco for a property of any kind is $1.4m)
Looking at median house prices in Topanga Canyon, it would appear that $1.4m is close to the median house value for a two-bed. One source just on median prices is here: https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/11036/CA/Los-Angeles/Topanga-Canyon/housing-market
If I were to suddenly "buy a £1m house" or whatever then, well... who would care? This is a bit of a hit piece. And the line about "not exactly the 'hood" - well what is that meant to mean? Are you not allowed to buy a house somewhere else? Do all black people have to stay in "the 'hood"? Genuinely, what does it mean?
------------------------------------------
What I would say, is that the Black Lives Matter Movement (note the capital M on Movement) - founded by Cullors; Garza; and Tometi - is different to the sentiment and to the wider decentralised social movement. I feel that @bigstemarra
- because he is a clever bloke, who I believe also likes to stir the pot a bit - has quite cleverly conflated the two in his derailment of this thread.
Re musings on "more dead black people" - I don't think the report re the Seattle CHOP zone is of great statistical significance: this documents a 24-day "occupation" where police did not patrol at all. HOWEVER it is obvious that fewer police = more crime. No doubt. And I am no advocate for getting rid of law enforcement and I don't think many serious lefties are, unless you can provide a source for this please bigstemarra.
Where in your source is it mentioned that - I quote - "folk were free to murder each other with impunity"? I Ctrl+F'ed on the CrimRXIV link both "murder" and "homicide", and found no reference to this happening in the CHOP, though there were of course accurate studies cited that - as you say - demonstrate fewer police = more crime (including murder of course) (NB this is true of all ethnic demographics).
Also, what is this "black community" to which bigstemarra refers? If I referred to "the white community", are (for instance) the white people of Blackpool and the white people of Primrose Hill all in that "community"?
-----------
I really enjoyed that Vox piece - thank you for sharing it @bigstemarra - as it's actually quite nuanced. Your framing of the issue is, again, characteristically clever and misleading. Where there are fewer incidences of lethal use of force by police, murder rates go up. Not "fewer police". This is an important distinction.
The reasoning for this ends up being quite nuanced: are criminals more emboldened? Could it be because people see the police as delegitimised after scrutiny re their actions? It's a massive question and neither I nor that study can really answer it comprehensively.
-----------
Personally, I think that when it comes to the States, the issue with policing is NOT that there are too many police officers, but moreso that they are funded in lieu of funding community schemes like we have in the UK, so have the burden of acting as social services - to varying extents state by state - which they are completely not right for.
Coupled with the genuine issues from what appear to be too many bad eggs in the system - look at Daniel Shaver (a white guy!) or George Floyd or whoever else - and I think that the US police landscape is in dire need of reform.
Defund the police works as a slogan in the US. It definitely DOESN'T in the UK, because it means something totally different.
-----------
So, like, why is wanting there to be less police brutality "virtue signalling"?
The house she bought, was actually worth £6M, that is a fact, not an opinion:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/black-lives-matter-california-property-cullors-b2052447.html
The point about ethnicity is relevant, because you have someone who talks a lot about 'the black community'. As soon as she gets her hands on some money, she decides she wants to live around rich white folks. The above article is from The Independent, which is so pro-BLM, it could reasonably be considered biased, yet it still considers that she has questions to answer, as would any rational person.
You have leapt on a small aside regarding ethnicity, yet have failed to address any of the larger points (e.g the effects of 'defunding the police'). Somehow I am not surprised.
Let's agree to disagree, eh?
He'll use powerful rhetoric to convince people that he is right. And it'll be deliberately ambiguous e.g. "BLM is a capitalist conspiracy", where he's referring to the organisation set up by Cullors et al. People will take this to mean that "the social movement that promotes black lives as mattering equally is a conspiracy", and BS won't deny that, or clarify it, I guess.
So, it's really clever stuff to be fair. I'm going to continue to disagree and respond where I can, though. But it's so hard to do this bit, when the easy bit of using florid language and posting "sources" from sites with agendas takes barely any time.
They'll pick on a fringe organisation with a few dodgy members and use that to rubbish the entire movement. Happens every time there's a risk to the status quo.
You and I perceive the world differently.
Weather in UK today: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/maps-and-charts/temperature-map#?model=ukmo-ukv&layer=temperature&bbox=%5B%5B42.779275360241904,-35.63964843750001%5D,%5B63.7630651860291,27.641601562500004%5D%5D
Just to add. I understand people have genuine concerns and I am in no way mocking how they feel.
The only thing I mock is the JSO tactics that disrupt people going about their lawful business. Ceertainly not helping their 'cause'.
I came across this quote just today:
"The ********* are the largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil, they have no equivalent," says historian Dr Fern Riddell.
Before we fill in the missing word....it is my understanding that the JSO people are protesting against the Government continuing to issue licenses for fossil fuel extraction despite being committed to driving down carbon emissions by 2050 and they are continuing to give the green light to carry on extracting fossil fuels rather than investing more heavily in sustainable energy sources.
With temperatures around the world today reaching 50 degrees centigrade it seems likely that in 100 years time our descendants - if they indeed have survived until 2123 - will wonder what the hell we were doing to address the problem of Global Warming.
I chose the 100 years and 2123 deliberately. Looking back 100 years to 1913 there were protests in Britain around that time on a scale never seen before.
The largest domestic terror organisation who ever operated on British soil was of course the Suffragettes.
They carried out acts of criminal damage which would make the JSO activists wince and yet100 years on we all now accept surely that women should have had the right to vote then and long before they finally achieved it in 1918.
If peaceful actions by JSO protestors (hardly terrorists) continue to highlight the issue of fossil fuel licensing then who knows, at some future date they might be viewed in the same light as the Suffragettes and if no one gets physically hurt then yes, it may be inconvenient, it may be annoying, it may be downright anti-social in some ways but it is short-term.
What is happening now to the Earth on which live is going to have a long-term effect on the planet from which it may indeed never recover unless urgent action is taken now.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a JSO activist or member of any political party.
In regard to Cullors, I refer you to the further piece posted above and her purchase of a £6M mansion, which she forgot to mention until someone found out. She is a con-artist, plain and simple.
Regarding the conflation of the BLM organisation and the movement, I take your point, but it is notable that this separation only started to occur when it became politically convenient; they are the same when it suits, and different when that is not convenient.
As regards the crime rate, I take on board that you do not advocate for defunding the police, but many do and it was one of the loudest calls of the BLM movement. Personally, I consider being allowed to set up your own armed road blocks in unpoliced zones as being 'free to murder with impunity':
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/parents-8-year-old-girl-killed-during-rayshard-brooks-protests-n1269951
Interestingly, as I pointed out at the time, the above was a headline dominating story in the US, but went unreported by the likes of the BBC, who chose to ignore anything that did not support their chosen BLM sympathetic, anti US police narrative. This was strange, because their coverage of BLM etc. was so enormous that you would have thought that George Floyd was murdered in the UK. You could also be forgiven for thinking the same when industrial scale virtue signalling occurred on the streets of this country too. Still, it's always amusing to watch some right on wally chanting 'don't shoot' at unarmed UK police officers, if nothing else.
https://ericpiza.net/2021/12/31/sea-chop/
This is just one CHOP zone study, and there are many others in cities such as Portland. Most of these have now been done away with, because they were total disasters for the local populace.
And yes, it is virtue signalling; not for wanting corrupt cops not to shoot minorities (or anyone for that matter), but for vapidly attaching oneself to a political movement in order to feed one's ego, e.g 'taking the knee' at football matches in arguably the world's least racist country (which achieves precisely nothing apart from boosting one's ego) instead of e.g donating money to causes attempting to address the underlying issues or doing volunteer work for those perceived to be victimised. There are people who I respect, even if I disagree with them, because they genuinely care about certain issues, but it is clear that many pretend to do, in order to gain praise and/or validation. Much of this is due to social media and the fear of ostracization, of course. I and many others find this tiresome, not least because the 'be kind' brigade are actually some of the most likely to encourage violence against those who disagree with them (c.f hate filled trans protestors banging on about 'love' one minute and dealing out violent misogynistic threats the next).
As for 'the black community', I take your point, but it is the identity politics movement that insisted that we should all see ourselves as belonging to one group or another, because only then can the pyramid of victimhood be established. For instance, we are told that we must have this rather peculiar display of annual narcissism that is 'Pride' to celebrate the LGBT etc. community, even though most gay people I know can't stand it because it makes it mainly involves attention seekers that make them want to cringe. They abhor the idea of identifying themselves by one of the many aspects of their personality as it is just an incidental part of them. However, in the media, we are constantly given representatives (often self appointed) of certain communities, who are there to let us know the feelings of those communities as that is the way things appear to be done these days.
This is the world that the 'progressives' have made for and we now just live in it.
Anyway, having hideously gone off topic, I think that I should give it a rest. I'm even boring myself!
Right, I'm off to glue myself to the M25.
Less than a hundred years ago, and within living memory for more people than we may realise.
The other day there was a piece on a woman who has lived in the same house she was born in for the last 105 years.
Also, Secoreia Turner was murdered by the Bloods who'd set up a barricade, I believe, as part of an opportunistic attempt to win some sort of control over territory. I'd have thought that "local interest" would play a part in the situation - could you see Olivia Pratt-Korbel's tragic murder getting as much interest in the US, for instance?
I will leave this here for now until we engage probably on HoC, if I ever bother to post substantively there, as this isn't a derailment so much as a completely different mode of transport.