Calls for Black Lives Matter UK to explain how it will spend £1million donations

Quantum Erasure

I think this deserves it's own thread,

So Solid Crew musician leads calls for Black Lives Matter to reveal the identities of its leaders and explain how it will spend £1million donations - as one of the anti-racism movement's masterminds says police should be AXED
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8443667/So-Solid-Crew-musician-leads-calls-Black-Lives-Matter-reveal-identities-leaders.html

Some of the group’s own supporters demanded greater transparency amid criticism of its far-Left policy agenda, which includes tearing down capitalism, abolishing the police and the closure of prisons.

Last week Premier League footballers wore shirts emblazoned with Black Lives Matters instead of their names. And in just over a fortnight, more than 33,000 people have donated online to BLM UK’s GoFundMe page, with the amount raised last night topping £1 million.

BLM UK is believed to have a ‘core’ leadership of around ten activists but their identities remain largely hidden because they say their safety is threatened. The only individual to be named is 30-year-old founding member Joshua Virasami

and theres a long article here "The avowed aims of the British arm of Black Lives Matter are revealed: Abolish the police, smash capitalism… and close all prisons"

this deserves to be talked about, what are we funding, what are we supporting, what are we kneeling in solidarity with?

s7ryf3925pivug

Tldr: daily mail opinion piece.

s7ryf3925pivug

Full transparency on donations is good. Abolishing prisons with no alternative suggestion is silly. Getting rid of police is also silly.

One state in the US disbanded it's police force and started a new one. This meant everyone had to reapply for a job. It was an apparently successful way of dealing with racism and corruption. It was discussed in a recent John Oliver episode.

Quantum Erasure

Brenna Delicious Tomato wrote: »

Tldr: daily mail opinion piece.

from their gofundme:
"We’re guided by a commitment to dismantle imperialism, capitalism, white-supremacy, patriarchy and the state structures that disproportionately and systematically harm Black people in Britain and around the world."

2u2me

There is a danger in casting this force as one thing; it seems to be several things that have fused together.

We're seeing occupy 2.0 (anti capitalist/ protesting too big to fail) which had mixed with anarchists in recent times that have grown hostile to American civilization, all of this now fused with black lives matter.

They're willing to work together to achieve their different goals. These include

• Abolishing the police/ justice institutions
• Abolishing American institutions.(Calls to defund mean they want to abolish)
• They now want to end S.T.E.M. aswell.

There is something organic about the anger, but it is a result of a process that does not begin with policing; it's a political/economical phenomena. This rudderless movement is lashing out at anything it can see without addressing the core problems.

ceannbui

2u2me wrote: »

• Abolishing the police/ justice institutions
• Abolishing American institutions.(Calls to defund mean they want to abolish)
  

defund does not mean abolish. You're using what D. Kahneman calls a cognitive heuristic, in this case 'substitution' (ie bias) which substitutes a difficult notion (ie cognitive load) for an easier one.
The two words (defund and abolish) have completely different meanings. What you are doing is substituting an ambiguous term (defund) for something that is more concrete (abolish) and 'dangerous to society'.
According to cognitive linguistics, such substitutions can also be more ideologically loaded.
the choice of words (ie framing) used to present an event are ideological

You are engaging in propaganda in order to push a narrative that is disconnected from the reality of the protesters. Instead you are pushing the narrative that the protesters (and therefore their goals) are agents of chaos, thereby pushing a 'crisis narrative'. Such 'crisis narratives' are used to shift extremist right-wing narratives into the mainstream. Unfortunately, with Covid and a possibly incoming economic Depression, such 'crisis narratives' will find fertile ground (eg see Germany during the inter-war period)

a simple way to overcome this bias is to try to understand what those who you disagree with are trying to say (ie what 'defund' means in this context). Those who have had it explained yet refuse to accept are deliberately attempting to manipulate public discourse to further their own extremist ends.

What i don't understand is how people on the right have been fine with 'defunding' (AboLIshinG!!@!!@) education and healthcare yet draw the line at 'defunding' police. Actually i do understand, i'm just pointing out the irony and hypocrisy

Slim Charles

ceannbui wrote: »

defund does not mean abolish. You're using what D. Kahneman calls a cognitive heuristic, in this case 'substitution' (ie bias) which substitutes a difficult notion (ie cognitive load) for an easier one.
The two words (defund and abolish) have completely different meanings. What you are doing is substituting an ambiguous term (defund) for something that is more concrete (abolish) and 'dangerous to society'.
According to cognitive linguistics, such substitutions can also be more ideologically loaded.
the choice of words (ie framing) used to present an event are ideological

You are engaging in propaganda in order to push a narrative that is disconnected from the reality of the protesters. Instead you are pushing the narrative that the protesters (and therefore their goals) are agents of chaos, thereby pushing a 'crisis narrative'. Such 'crisis narratives' are used to shift extremist right-wing narratives into the mainstream. Unfortunately, with Covid and a possibly incoming economic Depression, such 'crisis narratives' will find fertile ground (eg see Germany during the inter-war period)

a simple way to overcome this bias is to try to understand what those who you disagree with are trying to say (ie what 'defund' means in this context). Those who have had it explained yet refuse to accept are deliberately attempting to manipulate public discourse to further their own extremist ends.

What i don't understand is how people on the right have been fine with 'defunding' (AboLIshinG!!@!!@) education and healthcare yet draw the line at 'defunding' police. Actually i do understand, i'm just pointing out the irony and hypocrisy

Yeah, the right is the problem here. You're so deeply ingrained in this movement you can't see the trees for the forest.

ceannbui

Slim Charles wrote: »

Yeah, the right is the problem here. You're so deeply ingrained in this movement you can't see the trees for the forest.

mmm, yes. a well reasoned post. I agree /s


I assume most of your responses here are of this *searches for a non-judgemental descriptive word* quality?

TomTomTim

ceannbui wrote: »

defund does not mean abolish. You're using what D. Kahneman calls a cognitive heuristic, in this case 'substitution' (ie bias) which substitutes a difficult notion (ie cognitive load) for an easier one.
The two words (defund and abolish) have completely different meanings. What you are doing is substituting an ambiguous term (defund) for something that is more concrete (abolish) and 'dangerous to society'.
According to cognitive linguistics, such substitutions can also be more ideologically loaded.
the choice of words (ie framing) used to present an event are ideological

You're being incredibly dishonest. Most of slogans about this state that they want to "abolish" the police, not "defund" the police. That's a messaging mess up on your side, so stopping trying to shift the blame on others who are interpreting the language as it's usually used. Here's just one example: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html. You'll find many others with a quick Google search.

Slim Charles

ceannbui wrote: »

mmm, yes. a well reasoned post. I agree /s


I assume most of your responses here are of this *searches for a non-judgemental descriptive word* quality?

Hypocrisy of the highest order. You've got this belief that being a smart-ass and appearing well-educated elevates your opinion above everyone else's. A typical attitude of your sort. Everyone's opinion matters, except when they disagree with you. What a sad, sad person you are.

2u2me

2u2me wrote: »

There is a danger in casting this force as one thing; it seems to be several things that have fused together.

We're seeing occupy 2.0 (anti capitalist/ protesting too big to fail) which had mixed with anarchists in recent times that have grown hostile to American civilization, all of this now fused with black lives matter.

They're willing to work together to achieve their different goals. These include

• Abolishing the police/ justice institutions
• Abolishing American institutions.(Calls to defund mean they want to abolish)
• They now want to end S.T.E.M. aswell.

There is something organic about the anger, but it is a result of a process that does not begin with policing; it's a political/economical phenomena. This rudderless movement is lashing out at anything it can see without addressing the core problems.

Tbf that occupy movement was always going to come back....the way it ended with police beating people off the street and no real reform was a conclusion noone could be happy with


In the intervening 10 years,most of their points have proven largly correct as regards inequality etc......

World supposdely facing into a depression,middle class are little to no better off than working classes,while stockmarkets boom (pure fraud btw) and billionaires getting richer each month........you dont have to be a genius to see something has to give

kildare lad

Why don't they spend it on stab proof vests and hand them out around London to all the young black men who are going round stabbing each other to death

s7ryf3925pivug

Prisons make money in the USA, and this is why people are sent to them so much. It is cheap labour. I know this from watching John Oliver and listening to System of a Down.

After every major race related riot in America since the start of the 20th century, they studied how to avoid it happening in the future. In every case, they concluded the same thing - defund the police and invest in other social services. In every case this knowledge was ignored. (I know this from watching John Oliver too.)

The police are massively overfunded in the USA and they have military hardware and predator training. (That is literally the name of the programme.)

Rational policemen object to this themselves as the result is that they end up being called for everything, instead of just when someone actually needs a policeman.

If your only tool is a hammer then all you see is nails. Or in this case if your only well funded social service is a heavily armed police force then they're going to escalate situations inappropriately and shoot some people unnecessarily.

bloodless_coup

Slim Charles wrote: »

Hypocrisy of the highest order. You've got this belief that being a smart-ass and appearing well-educated elevates your opinion above everyone else's. A typical attitude of your sort. Everyone's opinion matters, except when they disagree with you. What a sad, sad person you are.

He even uses creepy asterisks. Very sad indeed.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/creepy-asterisks

Hande hoche!

bloodless_coup wrote: »

He even uses creepy asterisks. Very sad indeed.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/creepy-asterisks

That's fascinating. You learn something new.

ceannbui

TomTomTim wrote: »

You're being incredibly dishonest. Most of slogans about this state that they want to "abolish" the police, not "defund" the police. That's a messaging mess up on your side, so stopping trying to shift the blame on others who are interpreting the language as it's usually used. Here's just one example: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html. You'll find many others with a quick Google search.

You need to upskill your reading comprehension. Abolish and replace, which does NOT mean abolish and do nothing. You probably can't remember because it was a few minutes ago, so let me remind you;

the poster i was replying to said the BLM movement stands for abolishing the police. You're claiming he was right. The article you quoted states, clearly, abolish AND REPLACE.

And that is the OPPOSITE of abolish and do nothing
(ie something =/= nothing)

He was also talking about the movement in general (i think). The article you linked is one person's opinion (an opinion i happen to agree with in an American context). Can i extrapolate from one person to the group? If so, then does a person holding a rascist sign at a right-wing political rally mean i can then assume every right-wing person is rascist?

s7ryf3925pivug

All research and successful drug policies show
that treatment should be increased and law enforcement decreased while abolishing mandatory minimum sentences.

Rodney Bathgate

Anyone here who still supports blm should be ashamed of themselves.

#alm

Rodin

kildare lad wrote: »

Why don't they spend it on stab proof vests and hand them out around London to all the young black men who are going round stabbing each other to death

Or buy their knives off of them. Like they did in NZ with the guns

da_miser

For £1million they could purchase many a one way ticket back to the many Wakandan paradises in Africa for the oppressed black people that came to the UK uninvited and suffer under the white devils law and order.
The white devil runs such terrible countries , yet the BAME folk want to come to these countries, puzzling to say the least.

bloodless_coup

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Anyone here who still supports blm should be ashamed of themselves.

#alm

You are literally worse than Hitler

Rodney Bathgate

bloodless_coup wrote: »

You are literally worse than Hitler

What does that make blm supporters? Worse than Stalin or Pol Pot?

Danzy

BLM as an org has very bizarre views, fringe positions from the Trotskyite wing of politics.

tabby aspreme

ceannbui wrote: »

What i don't understand is how people on the right have been fine with 'defunding' (AboLIshinG!!@!!@) education and healthcare yet draw the line at 'defunding' police. Actually i do understand, i'm just pointing out the irony and hypocrisy

The healthcare budget is continually increasing, it's just continuously mismanaged.

Montage of Feck

Brenna Delicious Tomato wrote: »

All research and successful drug policies show
that treatment should be increased and law enforcement decreased while abolishing mandatory minimum sentences.

They're trying to build a prison for you and me to live in.

bfa1509

Here's Joshua himself:



The taliban scarf gives me the confidence that the money will go towards improving the lives of black people.

ceannbui

tabby aspreme wrote: »

The healthcare budget is continually increasing, it's just continuously mismanaged.

BLM and calls to defund the police are in large based primarily US/ UK, which is why i was speaking in a US/uk context, where healthcare and education have been defunded by right-wing economic orthodoxy (austerity budgets)

the healthcare budget in ireland is increasing relative to GDP? that's interesting.

ChelseaRentBoy

BLM is a very dangerous organisation. It's deeply worrying to see the traction they are gaining across the world.

ceannbui

bfa1509 wrote: »

Here's Joshua himself:


The taliban scarf gives me the confidence that the money will go towards improving the lives of black people.

The ignorance contained in this post gives me the confidence that nobody has a clue what they are talking about in this forum

Irish Praetorian

da_miser wrote: »

For £1million they could purchase many a one way ticket back to the many Wakandan paradises in Africa for the oppressed black people that came to the UK uninvited and suffer under the white devils law and order.
The white devil runs such terrible countries , yet the BAME folk want to come to these countries, puzzling to say the least.

I would caution you against heading down the road of becoming the thing you hate. As you yourself outline, a lot of these movements do indeed have a stilted and frankly deranged vision of the world; one which imagines that the areas which have done the most against racial discrimination, to be the most racist. Now that vision is patently false and we should oppose it, but in doing so we must be careful we do not go down the road of embracing the polarising rhetoric which this lunatic fringe espouses. The answer to the cries of racism and brutality is rational discussion and sober analysis, not surrendering the (for example) majority of the black population in the UK to the ideological vision of division and segregation.

Having said that, it might not be a bad idea for some of these lunatic ringleaders to see a little more of the world than the college campus, maybe get a sense of proportion

kildare lad

ChelseaRentBoy wrote: »

BLM is a very dangerous organisation. It's deeply worrying to see the traction they are gaining across the world.

It's putting out a message that all police are racists and murderers when in reality in America there's about a dozen unarmed shootings of black men a year. Funnily enough you never hear of them marching when hundreds of blacks are killed every year in Chicago by other blacks but when a white cop does it , they're on it like a hot snot .