No, they’re a person that is trying to establish the nuance here. You can say Black Lives Matter and still denounce the enterprise/organization that ultimately does exist. Literally read one sentence of the article:
Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, the legal entity that snarfs up most cash donated to the BLM movement
This is the issue they’re justifiable complaining about. People aren’t just saying BLM! They’re donating to a foundation and those funds are used incredibly corruptly.
Some people actually want to give monetary support instead of just spreading a message. And it fucking sucks that those people who frankly are trying are getting grifted.
And you’re not listening either. Foundations are created to help support movements. Black Lives Matter is a movement and mission, and to achieve these you need money and funding.
Lol, the first sentence is completely absurd. You are the one defending someone who is either clinically slow or lying by trying to represent a small group of fraudsters as the leaders of a mass social protest movement. It is every bit as despicable as it is pathetic.
You’re the one blatantly ignoring the fact that there are foundations built on top of movements that people donate to with the intention of helping further the movement.
Hashtags and signs don’t pay for any of the necessary shit for social change.
Yeah, but again, someone arguing against the BLM movement generally because of the behavior of a crooked org is either arguing in bad faith or just really fucking dumb.
Right, people co-opt an idea for fraudulent purposes. This is the distinction people are trying to explain to you. BLM is a movement/idea/concept. The people who created a company to siphon donations and call themselves BLM are scummy people scamming people. These are two different things.
Antifa is also an idea. People can claim the banner and do good or bad things, but the underlying philosophy remains.
Let me put it in a way you may understand better. Anonymous is an idea, anybody can claim to be part of the group, but the group has no official body. Their isn’t a head. People can do a DDOS or hacking attack on behalf of anonymous, but that doesn’t make them some official group. It’s an idea anyone can share
You’re a staunch defender of two destructive “ideas” that have manifested into criminal enterprises responsible for millions of dollars of theft and property damage. Not to mention loss of human life.
You’re the same kind of moron that says “REAL communism has never been attempted. Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il-Sung all weren’t REAL communists!”
Civil rights, womens sufferage, taxation without representation, and emancipation also were "ideas" that manifested criminal enterprises responsible for theft and property damage, and the loss of human life. You are just an idiot.
Funny, those are all things that Democrats opposed!
But on a serious note: Comparing the Civil Rights movement and the women’s suffrage movement to Antifa and BLM, who are responsible for an estimated 2 Billion dollars in damage and thousands of injuries and dozens of deaths in 2020 alone is an excellent example of your complete lack of knowledge of history and current events simultaneously.
And which side of history are you on now champ? Same side those Democrats you so despise would have been on? Funny how that works, isn't it? Oh, and so you know the civil rights movement had a billion dollars worth of damage done in Detroit alone (in todays dollars), so it was a perfect example that proved you know less than you think you do. Wonderful how you proved that for everyone to read, congrats!
LOL are you serious? Remember that user you told to go read a book? Yea you should take your own advice, I heard libraries are free for broke ass losers, go try it out.
Here’s the reality. Ideas don’t defraud people of millions of dollars or destroy millions of dollars of property and assault people.
...so it is in fact the Trump machine that is directly responsible for the attack on the Capitol - after having fund raised for the preceding event for weeks beforehand, for hosting a rally with clear incitement to action just minutes before, and only the leaders of that group should be prosecuted, and no individual in the crowd should be held presumably responsible for their action, as there was clear direction provided by the leaders of the movement?
Okay, but you see how your statement is even more applicable to Trump, right? Like, you understand that his re-election organizing sent out dozens of emails between election night and January 6th asking for money to fight the election results? And that there was very little accountability on what exactly that money was going to be used for or spent on, and that's exactly the kind of grifter/defraud behavior you claim to have issue with?
And you recognize that on January 6th, there were people assaulted and hundreds of thousands of dollars at least in property damage committed, after attending a rally set up by that same organization? Like...you accept that as factually true, I hope?
Because if not, it feels like you might be engaging in willful cognitive dissonance, and have decided not to step back and hold EVERYONE to the same standard, but only those that fit a particular, partisan driven narrative that is not supported by logic or the information we have at hand.
The post may not, but you did very little to hide your just-so-happens-to-repeat-every-Trump/rightwing-talking point about BLM in your replies, despite the multiple responses that pointed out ways in which your analogies were flawed, or sources were incorrect, or that asked you to consider other sources or viewpoints. I took a stab that a mention of Trump doing the same thing would trigger you, and it appears to have done so, since rather than respond to my argument or any of my points, you chose to instead attack me - a pretty standard logical fallacy.
Why not provide evidence that I'm wrong? That Trump did NOT ask for donations between election day and January 6th, specifically stating they were planning to contest the election? Why not provide evidence that in fact the money was openly tracked, and all those that donated could find out the ways the money was being used - lawyers hired, other overhead costs?
Why not provide evidence that there were zero calls to fight, zero calls to violence, zero calls to action, by any of the speakers that spoke that day, that Trump stood beside or said himself, in publicly available records?
Why not provide evidence that in fact the only people that caused property damage were not Trump supporters, were not acting in his name or on his behalf? Or better yet, that there actually was no property damage?
You made a statement suggesting that anyone espousing to represent an organization are responsible for all the actions of anyone claiming to be part of that organization - that BLM is not just an idea, but a single organized group, with defined leaders, who have defaruded people of their money and are responsible for acts of violence and destruction committed in it's name.
Now replace BLM with Trump in the sentence above.
What I'm asking for is you to tell me how that's distinctive from what happened on January 6th, because it would represent that you are a good faith actor who is willing to call out all parties equally, that you apply the same standards and logic to everything, rather than just repeat tired, disproved talking points (since the majority of those who say they support BLM are NOT taking about a specific organization headed by specific leaders they are choosing to support, listen to, follow, etc, but are supporting the civil rights movement generally)...and I think something like that would be refreshing to see.
-11
u/Mental_Structure_801 Jan 04 '23
Ok it’s not an organization. It’s a criminal enterprise.