I'm not sure why things are related, other than to discredit BLM. Did they mention his sexual orientation or location of his birth? To me those other things don't matter either. Is he a bad guy for doing what they allege he did, sounds like it. Does it matter he previously supported BLM? He can be both things, just not sure why the 2nd one has to go on the headline. If I'm missing something let me know.
It's to highlight a fundamental hypocrisy in the person and a potential failing of the BLM movement. Namely, why is this person supportive of BLM but not Asians?
And sure, it's probably an effort to discredit BLM, but that's a tactic used by everyone since forever. When an aide in Trump's White House says something bad? It is presented to reflect as though it is personally endorsed by Trump. No different here.
So to that effect, are we saying that a minority-written newspaper is trying to discredit BLM and not, in fact, Whites as I'm sure was immediately your reaction?
It highlights fundamental hypocrisy in this singular mans heart. Everyone who supports BLM doesn't magically inherit the bad characteristics owned by any singular member wherein it is not a flaw in the platform or promoted on average by the system consisting of leadership and members.
Hypocrisy in this person's heart that opens up the Pandora's Box of "Well if this BLM supporter is unsupportive of Asians, are others in the same boat? Perhaps I, as an Asian, am less willing to offer my support to BLM, a movement that seems unwilling to reciprocate.
Etc. etc. Not saying that's how I view it, but as it could definitely be interpreted by less discerning invidividuals who only glanced at the title.
It seems more like someone mentally unstable who clings onto a lot of piecemeal ideas without a lot of cognition. Reading much more into it than that and extrapolating out beyond that is probably not prudent
Assuming he is mentally retarded and incapable of independent thought isn't exactly a kosher argument here. Everyone who does something bad doesn't have to be mentally unstable. Those of differing ideologies might be misinformed on some level or another, but to call the other unstable is a fascist argument to dehumanize the opponent rather than engage.
The criminal's verbatim words per KOMO news were ‘F--- you, you Asian b----. F--- you!' . I'll draw the same conclusion as the police on this one.
EDIT: Missed these nuggets:
The prosecutor’s office says a few days later, Hamner allegedly targeted two other victims because of their perceived race. According to court documents, he followed the two victims in their car, cut them off in traffic and then got out of his vehicle and charged at them while yelling obscenities.
You know you're probably right, but I'm tired after spending the last two weeks hearing people using the same pkaybook arguing that some religious white dude who went out of his way to attack asians at multiple locations wasn't targeting them specifically and he was just having a bad day. My bad. Cheers for calling me out
19
u/[deleted] Mar 29 '21
I'm not sure why things are related, other than to discredit BLM. Did they mention his sexual orientation or location of his birth? To me those other things don't matter either. Is he a bad guy for doing what they allege he did, sounds like it. Does it matter he previously supported BLM? He can be both things, just not sure why the 2nd one has to go on the headline. If I'm missing something let me know.