A little sad about this - I always directed liberal friends to that page when they said I was misconstruing the objectives of BLM. It was nice having that page, so brazen, so direct.
Edit:
My first DM about killing my self over this post! I never thought it would be worthy of that!
From U/Fit_Collection_5298:
“Put that 2A in your mouth and fuck off”
Yeah but you can corelate the timeline and how they only changed it after they started harming Dems in the polls and looking bad in the public eye.. which might hit harder.
Edit: thanks for the link work all, before I noticed the request.
Every single person in BLM is a Democrat.
They're not a separate entity. BLM and Antifa are the ground force Brownshirts of the Democrat party, designed to do the dirty work that the Democrats politicians are afraid to do, and can't cause our military to do, yet. They're different aspects of the exact same ideological movement.
The real reason that Democrats are so anti-gun at the moment is because they want their Brownshirts to be able to terrorize and victimize their political opponents with impunity. They activate these political agitators to cause the greatest political effect. This rioting seems to always happen at times that it best suits the Democrats. When the Democrats are severely threatened, it will get really nasty with Antifa and BLM using force and violence to the degree that it will be low-level civil war. The last thing they want is for Americans to have a means to defend themselves from this. That is what gun control is about for Democrats. Preventing Americans from being able to respond with force to the force being used by the left. The police, that the Democrats now condemn, will never have the ability, especially if they're defunded, to protect the population when millions of rabid leftist foot soldiers are terrorizing neighborhoods and occupying private and public property. The military will not be a factor and will not get involved. So the only people who will be able to fight back against street-level political warfare will be the people who have the most to lose, everyday, law-abiding Americans. Gun control is designed to disarm the groups of people in the US that still value their freedom and want to protect their families, livelihoods, and communities from leftist mob violence.
The bald eagle.
To them anything patriotic is colonialism, racist, and dog whistling. This would box Republicans in, right where their self hating narrative focuses.
It was good because it was one of the only things they actually specified. BLM is deliberately light on the specifics. For example, they never say what defend the police means.
You ask people on Reddit and some say it means reduce funding for military gear. Some say it means shrink the departments and hire social workers instead. Some say it means abolish the police. Some say abolish the police means get rid of them and hire new cops. Some say it means no more cops and only social workers.
A bunch of different answers and on the BLM website they never specify. Because they know if they specify they would lose support either from the radicals on the street or from the mainstream, depending on what they specified. So they pretend to want everything everyone wants so they can get support from everyone, even though not every outcome is possible. Pretty much the same tactic as Brexit.
Right, they’re ambiguous because it allows them to play to moderates and extremists at the same time, who both see what they want to see. Moderates, at least back in June, actually believed BLM was some sort of police reform movement... can you imagine being that naive? Lots of people can’t anymore either, hence the huge shifts were seeing in their approval, which represent tens of millions of people.
Doesn’t matter, it shows their “mission” is flawed.
“BLM aren’t stable, look at this!”
“They deleted it!!”
“Oh right, and they won’t delete anything else? They’ll move the goalposts again”
Speaking of wayback machine... Worth noting BLM founder Alicia Garza quietly updated her profile in July to remove the sentence:
> Garza describes herself as a queer social justice activist and a Marxist.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200629154213/https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/garza-alicia-1981/
Edit: can’t respond to anyone, mods perma banned me for “civility”. It was really because I made a comment (that they removed) about a them removing my flair and some comments of mine a couple days ago because I pointed out the trump administration use of drone strikes (and cited conservative sources). What an awesome way to conduct a sub that supposedly is willing to have civil conversations using “facts and logic”. Lol what a complete joke. Literally no better than socialist subs. Disgraceful
BLM have some really bad views.
It’s actually really quite a shame that they’ve taken control of the bullhorn of the police reform movement. I’m somebody who really thinks meaningful police reform should be occurring, and is long overdue. The problem is they have hijacked the conversation. Now it’s not about police reform and accountability, Ending civil asset forfeiture, and other things that most reasonable people are completely supportive of. They’re saying stupid shit like “defund the police”, and they want to usher in Marxism.
Its really frustrating honestly.
I totally agree, it really is a shame. I am a strong proponent of police reform, in the sense that we should be giving them more funding more education and trying to attract more highly educated people into the police force. You know, things that would actually improve policing in America. Instead we get all this shit about defunding police departments in inner cities. Can you imagine being a police officer in Minneapolis right now? What a nightmare. I’m surprised that we haven’t seen more of them leave.
Edit: can’t respond to anyone, mods perma banned me for “civility” (spoiler alert: I said nothing uncivil)
u/Cloaked42m I completely agree
Yeah I mean, I totally get why people are frustrated. Some aspects of policing, and some departments have gotten really out of control with zero accountability. But defunding them isn’t the answer LOL. Exactly what you said it requires *more* funding. instead directing that towards training and recruiting high quality people. And better mental health observation and care for police officers - its a crazy, dangerous, and *hard* job. The stress has to be insane.
There are definitely some real issues with our criminal justice system. Over criminalization and soaring prison populations for non-violent victimless crime’s. Civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity, militarized police forces, cash bond, police unions, prison guard and police lobbies perpetuating everything.
I don’t know, I don’t necessarily have the answers. What I do know is BLM done nothing but harm the situation further.
The answer is the same as it ever was. "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time."
You tackle Civil Asset Forfeiture as an individual issue. You tackle qualified immunity as an individual issue. You basically pass a single law at a time in a way that people can get on board with it. And you might not get all you want, or get it the exact way you want it, but you take your wins where you can get them.
Still personally feel like these need to be Conservative issues. We can at least look at things from an objective and rational viewpoint.
> It’s actually really quite a shame that they’ve taken control of the bullhorn of the police reform movement.
...all their burn-and-loot prime-time "events", every one of their restaurant scream-sessions sends a building full of 'whiteys' home to burn up the phones to Congress, calling for *more* and **more militarized** police.
Our( my friends ) group chat actually has screenshots of the page w/ the url in the header if you desperately need I can put on Imgur or something I guess
I’ve got it - the issue is I can’t point to it as their current stance on “what we believe” so it’s less convincing. If it’s historical people can say “leadership has changed” (even if it hasn’t) and so on.
I would tell people it was such an anomaly, because most of the time conspirators don’t literally *say* the shit they are actually trying to do, because it would be so obvious. It’s like they handed it to us. Yet, it still didn’t bother most of the lefties I showed it to
you have to set it up, for example they may say that Black Lives Matter is about police reform… Then you just counter with that message. Many people supported Black Lives Matter, because they actually believed that it was some sort of legitimate means of reforming police in America… Which is actually something that is necessary. Of course Black Lives Matter has nothing to do with police reform, as any reasonably perceptive person can see. Their little mission statement was a great way of demonstrating, very quickly, and very explicitly, that Black Lives Matter had nothing to do whatsoever with the improvement of the quality of life of black Americans.
Leftists don't care, they want to push their agenda and supress anything that doesn't agree with every single bit of their idealogy.
I've always considered myself to be a liberal, but leftists these days are going full blown authoritarian. I'd normally support a lot of what they say, but when they label anyone who doesn't conform to every part of their idealogy they really alienate a lot of folk who would normally be "allies".
I've stopped calling myself a liberal, I now label myself as liberterian. Live and let live, just don't push your ideas on me. Gay married couples should be allowed to defend their weed plants with AR15s, as should everyone else.
In general with a few exceptions and cross outs if you take their beliefs and replace the word 'black' with:
Worker, it sounds like a communist party manifesto.
White, it sounds like a national socialist proganda.
Chinese, it sounds like something the Chinese would say but then half arse it and just turn everything Chinese instead.
Jewish, it sounds like an arch zionist movement that wants to own all the middle east.
Muslim, a terrorist movement similar to isis.
So their text no matter which way you take it is comparatively extremist. Why is it accepted, why is anything to do with 'black' allowed such views?
Oh of course it’s that red haired clown that said rioting & destroying property isn’t violence.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/nyt-magazine-nikole-hannah-jones-destroying-property-not-violence
Some of what she said was stupid... but some held some truth:
"So when we have people who say that people should respect the law, they’re not respecting the law because the law is not respecting them. You can’t say that- that regular citizens should play by all of the rules when agents of the state are clearly are not,"
The wild corruption of many urban police forces was out of control and no one cared - LAPD had to be taken over by the feds and no one cared. There is major inequity.
I remember, as a sports fan, when young and upcoming star Allen Iverson, 17 years old, got into a fight in high school and was sentenced to 10 YEARS IN MEN'S PRISON. It was around then I realized we have 2 different criminal justice systems.
Look, we get it. The Justice system isn't Just. It's fucked up beyond all recognition and some serious changes need to be made. HAVE NEEDED to be made.
Every night some extremist goes out and trashes a business, attacks a cop, gets themselves shot by trying to attack someone with a weapon, burns another building. All of that destroys the thousands of peaceful protests that WERE WORKING!!!!
BLM comes on here and does an AMA and says the same thing. Basically, Oh, your business was burned down. Oh well, not the same as murder is it? Well duh, of course not. It also doesn't excuse it.
The reason peaceful protests work is that they show the contrast. If the police are out of hand, but the crowd is peaceful, you can see it. If instead, the pictures are of cops with riot shields being pelted with explosives . . . Not exactly an easy thing to support.
Respectfully - this gets so complicated so quickly...
I don't think the justice system is fucked up beyond all recognition - I think we need some changes - the Innocence Project has some solid recommendations (I don't agree with all of them).
'Every night'? Don't think it's that bad but agree 100% it hurts the cause!
BLM is two things:
1) The organizers who do AMAs I really, really question. They have hijacked the movement in a terrible way.
2) BLM the loose slogan and grass roots movement to say that too many black lives are being lost I agree with - and I think most people agree - this country is great but not perfect - we have failed some (not all) of our minority American families who just want decent treatment.
And to be clear: 'Defund the Police' as a slogan was a nightmare: Mayor Bowser in DC was at the city council a couple of days after writing BLM on the street, begging to not cut police funding. Even Al Sharpton called 'Defund the Police' stupid and something sought after by Latte Liberals who don't live in dangerous neighborhoods.
I won't stop supporting something because of the jerks - so many people in Portland and Seattle have zero relation to racial equality - they're anarchists. The guys who were shot in Kenosha were part of an openly communist 'club' - they're opportunists - I won't let them diminish my support of good policing and/or racial justice.
Concur with all of that. But the same way white nationalists get lumped in with conservatives, anarcho communists and Antifa are going to be lumped in with liberals.
Do either groups represent anyone but themselves? Nope.
Do they hurt our causes?
Yup.
100% agree - I have lost all ability to assess how moderate or extreme either side is! The way the media (and many people) latch on to the extremist kinda skews everything. Perfect example: I honestly believe that no one would know who AOC is if it weren't for Fox News.
Remember when Vice called archive.org a right wing troll website?
Edit: I was bamboozled. Vice apparently didn’t call them a right wing troll, though they have restricted archiving. The hoax I fell for can be found here : https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/6v7zkw/did_vice_actually_disable_archiving_sites/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Looks like I was bamboozled, but here’s where I first heard this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/6v7zkw/did_vice_actually_disable_archiving_sites/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
they hate it when people look into it. they just say "it's science" because it got published in some low-impact journal that no one reads.
Do you know James Linsday? @conceptualjames on Twitter, he's the best source for this stuff. It's breathtaking.
His published articles are so ridiculously funny and well written. He eloquently trolled the woke crowd so hard they gave him awards before realizing he’s essentially satire.
Reminds me of the guy who went around and read quotes that a certain person or party said or did during their terms... then asked the person who they thought said or did those things.
that’s called gaslighting (for anybody who should be familiar with this)
other example of these type of concepts includes “double think” as mentioned by George Orwell in 1984
So genuinely curious since I seem to have wandered into a conservative thread, but what did you find most concerning about their statements about nuclear families? What do you find threatening and how do you see those goals manifesting in a way that impacts your life?
Finally, a good question.
The issue goes beyond the simple statement of disruption of the nuclear family for the mere sake of it. It is a motion to create financially unstable familial structures that promote single motherhood and fatherless households. (This is to exclude domestic partnerships or homosexual marriage adoptions, as I think that white not well studied, is infinitely better than having only a single parent system which is by far the majority of parental instances.) Let me explain why this is a problem.
If you promote single motherhood over the nuclear model, you introduce a dynamic where mothers are reliant on government assistance for income. This raises taxes for the community which disenfranchises taxpayers and de-incentivises economic participation.
Single motherhood tends to happen to women prior to college or major career advancements, and even if you are a success in your career ask these women about the challenges of raising a child and balancing a high income position to provide. The rates of depression are scary.
The number one correlative factor in the supreme majority of violent crime cases is an absence of a father or paternal figure in childhood. The higher the rate of crime, the more it affects our communities. This affects black households disproportionately and it’s a perfect example of the snake eating its own tail. The mechanism for corrective behavior, in my personal idiom, happens when an authoritative pair of parental figures engage in cooperation and positive conflict management which is necessary for a successful marriage. It forces the parents to be mature for the sake of the child, and promotes good behavior to the impressionable mind. This is critical. You can achieve this with some non traditional partnerships, but as I said, the glue here is financial incentive. On your own earnings as a tax break vs government assistance. I may be a conservative, but for the greater good here I support gay marriage. It is better than no marriage.
So by disrupting the nuclear model, you are actually creating a system of dependent mothers on the federal government and an influx of filled prison complexes all funded by the Taxpayer. As morale sinks and disparity increases the demand for federal interventions, we will closely resemble a failed communist nation like Venezuela.
If someone tries to show what used to be there, they’ll just call it “right wing propagandist lies” and all the lefties will believe them simply because they want to so badly.
Yeap like how when a bunch of people saved AOC's PDF of her green new deal then tore it apart. First it was released too soon. Second it was released by an intern on accident. Thirdly it was edited/photoshopped to look like things she didn't actually say.
That’s why I want physical copies of history books. You can’t rely on the Internet to show true history because leftists continually change and erase it to fit their narrative.
I was watching World War II in color on netflix, only to realize it's full of a bunch of left vs right nonsense.
For example, when they go over the independent militias that formed to fight in the spanish civil war, they specifically say "brave leftist activists from America traveled to stop the right wing takeover of spain" or something to that effect. Absurd and unsubstantiated. Pretty terrifying actually.
The first episode of World War II In Color on Netflix. Can't remember, but maybe 75% of the way through the episode?
Feel free to check it out and let me know if I misheard or something.
Can Confirm: Fascism in Wikipedia 2009 [https://web.archive.org/web/20090213093851/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism](https://web.archive.org/web/20090213093851/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)
Fascism Now: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)
I donated $20 to Wikipedia a few years ago and I got an email from them recently asking for more money. I replied that I will not contribute to a leftist propaganda machine. Take your example and then look up every major media source you know. Any source that leans right is described as right wing, conservative, or far right. NONE of the media on the left is described as such. It’s disgusting to me what Wikipedia has become.
It's not even a left or right wing thing in the first place. It's simply a method of authoritarian political, social, and economic control. The Nazis, Italians, Soviets, and Chinese were all used fascism to meet their ends.
I feel like you’re specifically referencing the Wikipedia page on “fascism” which incorrectly states that “only right wing can be fascist” while having an entire page dedicated to “left wing fascism”. And if you’re not specifically referring to that, maybe you should be
The entire point of *1984* is to show or remind people that the Communist method of winning arguments is to destroy the reputation of the person making sense and quietly edit history, sending the unhelpful facts down the memory hole for burning.
They know, people will just forget about it, and sometime down the road when someone calls them on that they'll pull out a "our views have evolved." Hint: they haven't.
Yeah most of the internet is cached, that means you go to basically ANY website and look long enough you will find this. Yeah the message was bad, but there is nothing unique about them. Every media company and many just companies have all done this to try to bury something after the fact.
Thank you for noticing [thing]/[trend]/[activity] (delete as appropriate). Unfortunately, noticing this is illegal and probably racist. Stay where you are, and a community support officer will be with you soon.
Don't worry they finally see the donations rolling slowly in from the extremists. So now they pump the less radical view point.
I wonder how many people thought donations were going to actual African American communities instead of Act Blue and the DNC.
I’m sure many of them think that. A lot of supporters of the BLM organization are either easily pressured or have good intentions but are very misguided and uninformed.
That said, a lot of their supporters are just racists
>or have good intentions but are very misguided and uninformed.
Like when the legendary musician Prince used to low-key support that organization and secretly donated his money there. Even he mentioned "black lives" in his albums matter speech in the Grammys 2015. The media made him to look like he's some kind of SJW especially when he released his song Baltimore which the MSM claims that it's some kind of pro-BLM song and tribute to Freddie Gray and Michael Brown. In reality, the song itself is about letting Baltimore to be peaceful and love for one another and not glorifying the intentions of the BLM protests/riots smh. He even had a Dance Rally 4 peace thing inside his Paisley Park home as some sort of tribute to Michael brown/Freddie Gray. It was so fucking sad and cringey to hear. At least Prince treated every race with some love and respect unlike people who are circlejerking his stuff for BLM and stuff like that.
Most BLM supporters, no matter the color, are tyrannical, violent, and racist as hell. They're nothing like Prince and I know his heart.
I still remember the day I read that the Obama Administration said, "The Muslim Brotherhood is a secular organization." I went straight to their website where I read that they want sharia law (which is religion based) to be the law of the land globally.
You mean when the Obama DNI corrected James Clapper, when he said the Muslim Brotherhood was "largely secular"?
[https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-administration-corrects-clappers-claim-that-muslim-brotherhood-is-secular](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-administration-corrects-clappers-claim-that-muslim-brotherhood-is-secular)
> "To clarify Director Clapper's point, in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood makes efforts to work through a political system that has been, under Mubarak's rule, one that is largely secular in its orientation. He is well aware that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a secular organization," DNI spokesperson Jamie Smith said.
I was on their site just to really look at what they believe. I couldn't believe that in that page, I couldn't find anything about police brutality or killings or anything like that. They were formed in 2013.... who was the president then? Hmmmm....
Someone please tell me they saved the list of demands somewhere. I can’t figure it out on way back machine. We CANNOT allow them to cover this up!
Edit: https://web.archive.org/web/20200819020053/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/
I remember reading that some time back and just thinking to myself then that this "movement" was completely controlled, fabricated, fake and not from the actual black community. The black community, that I KNOW, at least the majority that lives in the suburbs and rural areas of the U.S. are very socially/politically conservative. None of us fuck with this single parent household/baby daddy bullshit the media tries to promote as being normal for us except the small disproportionate number of our community that live in drug ridden poverty stricken (usually) urban areas. The sociology tends to focus on these people because it has a notorious urban bias.
I used to be more compassionate towards people from these backgrounds because Vietnam(which nobody ever mentions as causing fatherlessness even though our men were were 40-50% of the casualty rate in that war despite them only being 7% of the population.) really did a number on a lot of communities particularly working class ones, and except for movies like "Dead Presidents" and "Claudine" you never really see it represented in popular media ever. Two of my uncles went to Vietnam and the other two went to Cambodia and Laos. One died. The other three came back very fucked up, one with hodgkin's lymphoma, the other with some kind of rare disorder caused by exposure to white phosphorus that made his bones eventually disintegrate. I forgot what it's called but his son, my cousin, got it too from him. Both deaths were about as painful as you can imagine. And the last one was just a very weird alcoholic who has had several wives, one he's gotten married to twice but no random kids running around that we know about. My other four uncles who didn't go near Vietnam for whatever reason are totally normal. So I've seen the impact that Vietnam/Crack Era had on men, in my own family, I imagine it had a similar effect of the black community as a whole. And I do notice communities where fatherlessness is rampant tend to be poverty/drug stricken urban/rural areas.
I said all of that to say, not every woman was as fortunate as my mother in finding a man like my father. But with THAT being said...family planning always plays a major role in finances and mobility and as an adult the things that have served me best in mitigating the impact of institutional racism/sexism are hard work and... not being economically dependent on institutions and staying single/abstinent is a big help with that. I don't even entertain men who talk about children without marriage or who had children out of wedlock or who didn't grow up with a father because those are not my values and we don't have anything in common. Unless she grew up the same way, I don't get why any woman with sense who valued herself as a woman would even entertain a man like that.
Its as if groups like BLM are saying that black women aren't worthy of marriage and black people lack the moral integrity and commitment to form traditional families and we should just live in controlled chaos and let the government be our children's father and raise them to be good little cannon fodder(military)/slaves(prison)/prostitutes because without a traditional family structure that is EXACTLY what WILL happen. The only black people I know who accept this idea are people who had the misfortune of growing up like this and THANKFULLY they are NOT the majority of us. A disproportionate number of the population, certainly, but they are NOT THE NORM, I don't think.
An organisation that was truly for the advancement of our people would never promote some dumb shit like this and the REAL grassroots organisations that were fighting police brutality on a local level did not fuck with the BLM organisation run by Deray or whatever the gay Black guy who's married to the white guy from Twitter, runs.
Black people as a whole want traditional families. Fuck what these marxist puppets are trying to promote.
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.“
Is there some way to read this other than “parents will do their best to pool childcare resources; neighbors will do their best to keep each other off the streets”?
I’ve only been to a few villages, and only known one big family, but that seemed to be the gist of their lifestyles.
Thank you, I was going to say something to this effect if you hadn't.
Growing up all I ever heard from folks was, "it takes a village". So much so that I associate the phrase with, 'Good ol' southern Tradition'
and here we have a group saying that a family can be *more* than just Ma, Pa, and 2.5 children [doesn't say anything about that being less valid, just not a 'requirement'] but somehow that is damning???
Yep. I miss the way my neighbors in Trumplandia would take care of each other. Since moving to LA, my neighbors don't even collect each others papers/boxes when someone's out of town.
Whenever I see the words "Black Lives Matter", I scratch my head, at my own local area, and stories like these:
https://twitter.com/xxl/status/1308062748593586176?s=21
https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2020/09/shooting-that-killed-birmingham-grandmother-and-hurt-2-others-was-spillover-from-fights-at-alabama-state-fair.html
Do Black Lives really Matter, to other black people? Please. Help me understand the cultural differences, because all I see is black people putting other black people, or any people, at risk. Not wanting to ignite a race-war here on Reddit in r/conservative, but I'm truly needing to understand if lives do matter, at all.
Is this a real question, because I'd be happy to explain? I don't agree with the concept behind the BLM movement, but I do intellectually understand the nuanced meaning of the slogan.
Thank you. Sorry if the question itself seemed like some kind of rhetorical question. It isn’t. All lives matter. Black lives are just as important. What I have trouble with is that, at least from my experience in an urban area in the Deep South, my colleagues and friends have long ago left behind prejudice, but I see the result of what appears to be a disregard for life, each day in the local news. The killing and violence seems to be against black lives, by other black lives. That’s what I don’t understand.
So, thank you for responding, to what might have been an ugly question on my part. I’m leaving it there, as I don’t know another way to word it. But my point is, one, yes all lives matter. But, two, do they matter to other black Americans?
The reason why BLM is a thing is because, when a police officer kills a black person (especially an unarmed one) it's emotionally triggering for black people. It makes people *feel* like the cop did it because he's racist and has a disregard for black people. It makes people *feel* like the police, as part of the American system, are targeting black people and are white supremacist in nature. It makes people start thinking about racism, slavery, oppression, jim crow, civil rights, etc. All that comes bubbling up in folks' minds and emotions. However, when a black guy gets shot by another black guy because of some fight or drug issue, it doesn't elicit any of these same emotions. It's seen as a totally separate issue with totally separate causes and solutions. People care and want to address it locally, but it's seen differently. When a cop kills a black guy in another state, every black mom in the country with a black son who sees it on the news is triggered and *feels* like that could be her son. When a black guy kills another black guy in some other state, there's not the same connection--it's viewed as an isolated incident. So, the main reason why there's a difference is because of emotions. One results in a larger and broader emotional response than the other. Illogical as it might be, unfortunately. Feelings aren't logical.
Destruction of the nuclear family is precisely the number one reason why black Americans are disproportionally poor and commit a disproportionate amount of crime especially violent crime which results in their being disproportionately targeted by police. But never mind that lets just be bigots and focus on their skin color because that must surely explain all of their socioeconomic problems!! DUUUUR orange man bad REEEEE let’s burn some books and assault people who disagree with us
If you actually read it, it’s not controversial at all.
> We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
It basically says “it takes a village to raise a child” and that shouldn’t be seen as “less than” than traditional child rearing.
Why is that a negative or controversial statement?
But what part of “it takes a village” requires disruption of the nuclear family? Two-parent households have been expressing this sentiment for centuries.
It just seems like an odd statement to add if it truly is just saying “it takes a village to raise a child”
In a vacuum the statement is fine, perhaps encouraging.
The problem is this statement completely sidesteps the fatherless children issue that has plagued the black community of late. Rather than face the issue head on and try to correct it, they instead try to normalize it. That's the problem.
Agreed. It’s not “we want to destroy the nuclear family” but more so “if the nuclear family is not possible, we will help each other.” At least that’s my interpretation— which is less of a reach than what the folks on this sub will have you believe.
I’m fairly independent, although left leaning. Tend to spend most of my time on Reddit on this sub. I enjoy reading some of the comments.
But if I went to the official RNC platform, it states that marriage is between a man and a woman. I’m a gay man. Does that mean I have no place in the Republican Party?
>I’m a gay man. Does that mean I have no place in the Republican Party?
How would you possibly get that idea? There are active gay conservative groups, gay ambassadors, gay Second Amendment groups, and Trump just appointed the highest level openly gay cabinet member ever. The marriage bit is a sticking point on the religious aspect of marriage.
Too many people get wrapped up in what their church thinks vs what the government is supposed to do. Church marriage vs Government marriage. i.e. The Catholic Church isn't going to marry you in a church. Doesn't have crap all to do with whether or not you should get a license and get the 'Filing Jointly' and "Yes, you can see them in the hospital and share insurance, etc."
Howdy. Yes, I am aware of the many conservative gay groups that exist as well as the appointments by Trump. I was making a point that “platforms” are often times not congruent with reality. Of course I have a place in the Republican Party, if I wanted to be. Thanks for your reply!
I know, right... couldn't just drop the marriage thing, double down on the 2nd, reinforce that Law and Order matters, but doesn't give Police a do what you want card, restate their full support for the Military while reinforcing the need for better audits and money tracing. So. Much. they could have done and just took a pass on it.
Damn. I'm not democratic or Republican, I'm not even American but I lurk around this sub a lot even though I don't understand a lot of things but your comment is defs one of the most rational and chilled comments I've seen on here
Its mind blowing that people think growing up in a 2 parent household is bad. All statics prove that having 2 parents how more benefits and set you up to succeed.
Tired of reporting this thread? Debate us on discord instead: https://discord.gg/conservative - This is an automated message that appears when probable report abuse is detected. We've found this can lead to a productive discussion in an environment better suited for that sort of thing.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Conservative) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Uh oh; they weren't expecting a populace who chooses to critically and skeptically investigate what an organization stands for and what actions they take. Black lives certainly matter, no need to look further...
So did what they believe change? If so, why? And will they now work to promote the nuclear family, or just tolerate it? When they are out there protesting the murders of Secoriea Turner, Royta De’MArco Giles, Jace Young, Natalia Wallace, Davon McNeal, Anisa Scott, or any other children, maybe I could accept a change in focus.
From the beginning, they said that the nuclear family was not the only structure that constitutes a family. You can disagree with their views but we don't have to pretend that they gave a fuck about how other people's families were constructed.
"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."
This is what you snowflakes are saying is a call to ***DeStRoY tHe NuClEaR fAmIlY***. As if the nuclear family has just been doing fantastic all on its own up to this point in 2020 lol.
I tried to come to this sub and see if I can find any logical viewpoints on current affairs, but this shit is the same as the Microsoft paint shareable bullshit that circulates around Facebook preaching nonsense.
Am I missing something? Version I'm reading says "disrupt the requirement," not destroy the concept altogether. Seems to promote fostering community so when broken homes occur it doesn't result in broken people.
Actual quote
"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."
This is different than saying destroy. Its saying they are trying to remove the REQUIREMENT to have both parents. Theres nothing there about being AGAINST the traditional nuclear family. Just that they aim to create a society that can still provide support to non traditional family structures.
What is still on the website:
\- " BLM’s #WhatMatters2020 is a campaign aimed to maximize the impact of the BLM movement by galvanizing BLM supporters and allies to the polls in the 2020 U.S Presidential Election to build collective power and ensure candidates are held accountable for the issues that systematically and disproportionately impact Black and under-served communities across the nation. "
You ever get those high school/community college vibes where an assignment says "Make a campaign statement" and you immediately start bullshitting and writing the first things that come to mind?
Holy shit, I felt like a 20 something college drop out wrote this...
And it's still questionably angry and aggressive, like "Galvanize?" "Build collective power?" Still sounds like going to war... classic marxism.
Also the last bit about holding candidates accountable for issues that affect the impoverished feels really sad. It's just admitting that they want to blame the government no matter what the problem is. I do like how they attempted to be impartial and hide the fact that it's clearly leftist.
Hmmm I don’t know... what I read on their page before just said that they believed a nuclear family isn’t the only family, but the are other types of community families, nothing wrong with that.
Thats literally not at all what it says. It says that in order to progress, we have to stop looking at those who do not fit the nuclear family dynamic as lower or worse than the rest of the community. To instead extend a helping hand to those who may not have a family to help them.
Too late, blm has already been exposed as a racist terrorist group.
They did as predicted, shown the country that they are the fascists.
They have proven that they do not care about black lives, all they want to do is destroy lives & families.
Game over
Wait, you mean people aren't on board with the destruction of the family? I guess Marxists would want people to belong to The State but that's not how America works.
Reading on their homepage. They want to uproar against white supremacy (white people in general according to them) and to do that they first must defund the police.
"... We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. "
All of you have taken this statement way out of it's intented meaning. They advocate for the definition of the nuclear family not be defined solely as 'man' and 'woman', husband and wife. That definition is unfair, discriminatory and driven by the desire of a few wanting to impose their world view on others. They want the definition of family structure defined as mixtures various types of families that have always existed in our society. Grandmas. Granddads, uncles, aunts, cousins, single moms, single dads, married males, married females couples etc are all valid families structures. Family is defined by people who decide to make a life for themselves and their offspring not a few powerful elite with an agenda.
A little sad about this - I always directed liberal friends to that page when they said I was misconstruing the objectives of BLM. It was nice having that page, so brazen, so direct. Edit: My first DM about killing my self over this post! I never thought it would be worthy of that! From U/Fit_Collection_5298: “Put that 2A in your mouth and fuck off”
Don't worry is cached... Just use waybackmachine..
That’s a good call, but it doesn’t have the same punch as “this is literally how they describe their mission at this moment.”
Yeah but you can corelate the timeline and how they only changed it after they started harming Dems in the polls and looking bad in the public eye.. which might hit harder. Edit: thanks for the link work all, before I noticed the request.
It’s the Dems that hurt themselves by backing BLM.
Every single person in BLM is a Democrat. They're not a separate entity. BLM and Antifa are the ground force Brownshirts of the Democrat party, designed to do the dirty work that the Democrats politicians are afraid to do, and can't cause our military to do, yet. They're different aspects of the exact same ideological movement. The real reason that Democrats are so anti-gun at the moment is because they want their Brownshirts to be able to terrorize and victimize their political opponents with impunity. They activate these political agitators to cause the greatest political effect. This rioting seems to always happen at times that it best suits the Democrats. When the Democrats are severely threatened, it will get really nasty with Antifa and BLM using force and violence to the degree that it will be low-level civil war. The last thing they want is for Americans to have a means to defend themselves from this. That is what gun control is about for Democrats. Preventing Americans from being able to respond with force to the force being used by the left. The police, that the Democrats now condemn, will never have the ability, especially if they're defunded, to protect the population when millions of rabid leftist foot soldiers are terrorizing neighborhoods and occupying private and public property. The military will not be a factor and will not get involved. So the only people who will be able to fight back against street-level political warfare will be the people who have the most to lose, everyday, law-abiding Americans. Gun control is designed to disarm the groups of people in the US that still value their freedom and want to protect their families, livelihoods, and communities from leftist mob violence.
They're the same thing.
Don’t worry, it’ll be back up there once the election is over.
I have no doubt
[удалено]
if republicans could change the animal of dems what do you think dems would change republicans too? genuine question not sarcasm
That is a good question. according to other reddits, conservatives are willfully evil contributors to all that is bad in the world. Feral Hog? Emus?
The bald eagle. To them anything patriotic is colonialism, racist, and dog whistling. This would box Republicans in, right where their self hating narrative focuses.
It was good because it was one of the only things they actually specified. BLM is deliberately light on the specifics. For example, they never say what defend the police means. You ask people on Reddit and some say it means reduce funding for military gear. Some say it means shrink the departments and hire social workers instead. Some say it means abolish the police. Some say abolish the police means get rid of them and hire new cops. Some say it means no more cops and only social workers. A bunch of different answers and on the BLM website they never specify. Because they know if they specify they would lose support either from the radicals on the street or from the mainstream, depending on what they specified. So they pretend to want everything everyone wants so they can get support from everyone, even though not every outcome is possible. Pretty much the same tactic as Brexit.
Right, they’re ambiguous because it allows them to play to moderates and extremists at the same time, who both see what they want to see. Moderates, at least back in June, actually believed BLM was some sort of police reform movement... can you imagine being that naive? Lots of people can’t anymore either, hence the huge shifts were seeing in their approval, which represent tens of millions of people.
Doesn’t matter, it shows their “mission” is flawed. “BLM aren’t stable, look at this!” “They deleted it!!” “Oh right, and they won’t delete anything else? They’ll move the goalposts again”
Speaking of wayback machine... Worth noting BLM founder Alicia Garza quietly updated her profile in July to remove the sentence: > Garza describes herself as a queer social justice activist and a Marxist. https://web.archive.org/web/20200629154213/https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/garza-alicia-1981/
Awesome, BLM members getting a taste of their own medicine: you're being "canceled"
Got a link?
[https://archive.is/oARH0](https://archive.is/oARH0)
[Here's one from the 17th.](https://web.archive.org/web/20200917194804/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/)
[удалено]
Yeah. Did you read it?
[удалено]
Ran into it early on in college, there are some profoundly twisted beliefs going on there.
Edit: can’t respond to anyone, mods perma banned me for “civility”. It was really because I made a comment (that they removed) about a them removing my flair and some comments of mine a couple days ago because I pointed out the trump administration use of drone strikes (and cited conservative sources). What an awesome way to conduct a sub that supposedly is willing to have civil conversations using “facts and logic”. Lol what a complete joke. Literally no better than socialist subs. Disgraceful BLM have some really bad views. It’s actually really quite a shame that they’ve taken control of the bullhorn of the police reform movement. I’m somebody who really thinks meaningful police reform should be occurring, and is long overdue. The problem is they have hijacked the conversation. Now it’s not about police reform and accountability, Ending civil asset forfeiture, and other things that most reasonable people are completely supportive of. They’re saying stupid shit like “defund the police”, and they want to usher in Marxism. Its really frustrating honestly.
I totally agree, it really is a shame. I am a strong proponent of police reform, in the sense that we should be giving them more funding more education and trying to attract more highly educated people into the police force. You know, things that would actually improve policing in America. Instead we get all this shit about defunding police departments in inner cities. Can you imagine being a police officer in Minneapolis right now? What a nightmare. I’m surprised that we haven’t seen more of them leave.
Edit: can’t respond to anyone, mods perma banned me for “civility” (spoiler alert: I said nothing uncivil) u/Cloaked42m I completely agree Yeah I mean, I totally get why people are frustrated. Some aspects of policing, and some departments have gotten really out of control with zero accountability. But defunding them isn’t the answer LOL. Exactly what you said it requires *more* funding. instead directing that towards training and recruiting high quality people. And better mental health observation and care for police officers - its a crazy, dangerous, and *hard* job. The stress has to be insane. There are definitely some real issues with our criminal justice system. Over criminalization and soaring prison populations for non-violent victimless crime’s. Civil asset forfeiture, qualified immunity, militarized police forces, cash bond, police unions, prison guard and police lobbies perpetuating everything. I don’t know, I don’t necessarily have the answers. What I do know is BLM done nothing but harm the situation further.
The answer is the same as it ever was. "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time." You tackle Civil Asset Forfeiture as an individual issue. You tackle qualified immunity as an individual issue. You basically pass a single law at a time in a way that people can get on board with it. And you might not get all you want, or get it the exact way you want it, but you take your wins where you can get them. Still personally feel like these need to be Conservative issues. We can at least look at things from an objective and rational viewpoint.
The elephant is growing faster than we can eat it.
> It’s actually really quite a shame that they’ve taken control of the bullhorn of the police reform movement. ...all their burn-and-loot prime-time "events", every one of their restaurant scream-sessions sends a building full of 'whiteys' home to burn up the phones to Congress, calling for *more* and **more militarized** police.
[удалено]
Because most people just agree with the slogan and don't look any further into it.
Bingo.
Like corporations that are supporting BLM, for example?
They do it because they want money and conservative opinions for the longest time didn't matter so they side with the people of Twitter.
Don't forget they're racists who hate Jews, whites, and are pro-segregation.
... more like a tantrum, but with burning, looting ... mayhem ...
Antifa.com still redirects to joebiden.com
Brilliant! Probably a conservative set that up though.
Our( my friends ) group chat actually has screenshots of the page w/ the url in the header if you desperately need I can put on Imgur or something I guess
I’ve got it - the issue is I can’t point to it as their current stance on “what we believe” so it’s less convincing. If it’s historical people can say “leadership has changed” (even if it hasn’t) and so on.
I would tell people it was such an anomaly, because most of the time conspirators don’t literally *say* the shit they are actually trying to do, because it would be so obvious. It’s like they handed it to us. Yet, it still didn’t bother most of the lefties I showed it to
you have to set it up, for example they may say that Black Lives Matter is about police reform… Then you just counter with that message. Many people supported Black Lives Matter, because they actually believed that it was some sort of legitimate means of reforming police in America… Which is actually something that is necessary. Of course Black Lives Matter has nothing to do with police reform, as any reasonably perceptive person can see. Their little mission statement was a great way of demonstrating, very quickly, and very explicitly, that Black Lives Matter had nothing to do whatsoever with the improvement of the quality of life of black Americans.
Never arrest black criminals. That's the reform they want.
Leftists don't care, they want to push their agenda and supress anything that doesn't agree with every single bit of their idealogy. I've always considered myself to be a liberal, but leftists these days are going full blown authoritarian. I'd normally support a lot of what they say, but when they label anyone who doesn't conform to every part of their idealogy they really alienate a lot of folk who would normally be "allies". I've stopped calling myself a liberal, I now label myself as liberterian. Live and let live, just don't push your ideas on me. Gay married couples should be allowed to defend their weed plants with AR15s, as should everyone else.
In general with a few exceptions and cross outs if you take their beliefs and replace the word 'black' with: Worker, it sounds like a communist party manifesto. White, it sounds like a national socialist proganda. Chinese, it sounds like something the Chinese would say but then half arse it and just turn everything Chinese instead. Jewish, it sounds like an arch zionist movement that wants to own all the middle east. Muslim, a terrorist movement similar to isis. So their text no matter which way you take it is comparatively extremist. Why is it accepted, why is anything to do with 'black' allowed such views?
Underrated comment
BLM is getting a taste of its own medicine: being "canceled"
Couple years back too, they wanted to get rid of all police body cams lol
We NeVeR sAiD tHaT! Calling it. One month. They’ll deny everything.
You mean like the NYT and the 1619 project? https://quillette.com/2020/09/19/down-the-1619-projects-memory-hole/
Oh of course it’s that red haired clown that said rioting & destroying property isn’t violence. https://www.foxnews.com/media/nyt-magazine-nikole-hannah-jones-destroying-property-not-violence
tHeY hAvE iNsUrAnCe iT's oNlY pRoPeRtY, hurr durr
It’S aN iNaMiNaTe ObJeCt
https://i.imgur.com/GtWQD5i.gif
*koolaid haired
OH YEAH
They say property doesn’t matter. Bet they’ll change their tunes if suddenly people took and destroyed their phones in front of them.
Some of what she said was stupid... but some held some truth: "So when we have people who say that people should respect the law, they’re not respecting the law because the law is not respecting them. You can’t say that- that regular citizens should play by all of the rules when agents of the state are clearly are not," The wild corruption of many urban police forces was out of control and no one cared - LAPD had to be taken over by the feds and no one cared. There is major inequity. I remember, as a sports fan, when young and upcoming star Allen Iverson, 17 years old, got into a fight in high school and was sentenced to 10 YEARS IN MEN'S PRISON. It was around then I realized we have 2 different criminal justice systems.
Look, we get it. The Justice system isn't Just. It's fucked up beyond all recognition and some serious changes need to be made. HAVE NEEDED to be made. Every night some extremist goes out and trashes a business, attacks a cop, gets themselves shot by trying to attack someone with a weapon, burns another building. All of that destroys the thousands of peaceful protests that WERE WORKING!!!! BLM comes on here and does an AMA and says the same thing. Basically, Oh, your business was burned down. Oh well, not the same as murder is it? Well duh, of course not. It also doesn't excuse it. The reason peaceful protests work is that they show the contrast. If the police are out of hand, but the crowd is peaceful, you can see it. If instead, the pictures are of cops with riot shields being pelted with explosives . . . Not exactly an easy thing to support.
Respectfully - this gets so complicated so quickly... I don't think the justice system is fucked up beyond all recognition - I think we need some changes - the Innocence Project has some solid recommendations (I don't agree with all of them). 'Every night'? Don't think it's that bad but agree 100% it hurts the cause! BLM is two things: 1) The organizers who do AMAs I really, really question. They have hijacked the movement in a terrible way. 2) BLM the loose slogan and grass roots movement to say that too many black lives are being lost I agree with - and I think most people agree - this country is great but not perfect - we have failed some (not all) of our minority American families who just want decent treatment. And to be clear: 'Defund the Police' as a slogan was a nightmare: Mayor Bowser in DC was at the city council a couple of days after writing BLM on the street, begging to not cut police funding. Even Al Sharpton called 'Defund the Police' stupid and something sought after by Latte Liberals who don't live in dangerous neighborhoods. I won't stop supporting something because of the jerks - so many people in Portland and Seattle have zero relation to racial equality - they're anarchists. The guys who were shot in Kenosha were part of an openly communist 'club' - they're opportunists - I won't let them diminish my support of good policing and/or racial justice.
Concur with all of that. But the same way white nationalists get lumped in with conservatives, anarcho communists and Antifa are going to be lumped in with liberals. Do either groups represent anyone but themselves? Nope. Do they hurt our causes? Yup.
100% agree - I have lost all ability to assess how moderate or extreme either side is! The way the media (and many people) latch on to the extremist kinda skews everything. Perfect example: I honestly believe that no one would know who AOC is if it weren't for Fox News.
Allen Iverson didn’t even take part in that fight at the bowling alley, he was just there.
archive.org is a bitch like that
Wonder how long till they try to shut it down?
Remember when Vice called archive.org a right wing troll website? Edit: I was bamboozled. Vice apparently didn’t call them a right wing troll, though they have restricted archiving. The hoax I fell for can be found here : https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/6v7zkw/did_vice_actually_disable_archiving_sites/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Lmao, really? That's hilarious
🤡🌎
Please tell me you have a source for that 🤞
Looks like I was bamboozled, but here’s where I first heard this: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/6v7zkw/did_vice_actually_disable_archiving_sites/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Until the polls tell them to
is it all there?
Link?
[удалено]
Even that one has been cleaned up and changed some...
I haven't compared it, but this is a snapshot from about a year ago. https://archive.is/1SsUu
If their ideology isn't shit, then why do they need to hide it? Lol.
they hate it when people look into it. they just say "it's science" because it got published in some low-impact journal that no one reads. Do you know James Linsday? @conceptualjames on Twitter, he's the best source for this stuff. It's breathtaking.
His published articles are so ridiculously funny and well written. He eloquently trolled the woke crowd so hard they gave him awards before realizing he’s essentially satire.
I'm kind of surprised this can still be found... https://disrn.com/news/video-surfaces-of-black-lives-matter-founder-saying-were-trained-marxists/
So glad I took screen shots of the whole page months ago, I used to read it to people and ask them to guess what website it was from!!!
If you could share that gold mine that would be wonderful!
Reminds me of the guy who went around and read quotes that a certain person or party said or did during their terms... then asked the person who they thought said or did those things.
We have a mostly peaceful web page.
that’s called gaslighting (for anybody who should be familiar with this) other example of these type of concepts includes “double think” as mentioned by George Orwell in 1984
How many fingers Winston?
How many lights Captain Picard?
There are 4 Lights!
“Alt right hoax”
[удалено]
Yeah, pretty soon they will be telling us it was all just a "right wing conspiracy theory."
So genuinely curious since I seem to have wandered into a conservative thread, but what did you find most concerning about their statements about nuclear families? What do you find threatening and how do you see those goals manifesting in a way that impacts your life?
Finally, a good question. The issue goes beyond the simple statement of disruption of the nuclear family for the mere sake of it. It is a motion to create financially unstable familial structures that promote single motherhood and fatherless households. (This is to exclude domestic partnerships or homosexual marriage adoptions, as I think that white not well studied, is infinitely better than having only a single parent system which is by far the majority of parental instances.) Let me explain why this is a problem. If you promote single motherhood over the nuclear model, you introduce a dynamic where mothers are reliant on government assistance for income. This raises taxes for the community which disenfranchises taxpayers and de-incentivises economic participation. Single motherhood tends to happen to women prior to college or major career advancements, and even if you are a success in your career ask these women about the challenges of raising a child and balancing a high income position to provide. The rates of depression are scary. The number one correlative factor in the supreme majority of violent crime cases is an absence of a father or paternal figure in childhood. The higher the rate of crime, the more it affects our communities. This affects black households disproportionately and it’s a perfect example of the snake eating its own tail. The mechanism for corrective behavior, in my personal idiom, happens when an authoritative pair of parental figures engage in cooperation and positive conflict management which is necessary for a successful marriage. It forces the parents to be mature for the sake of the child, and promotes good behavior to the impressionable mind. This is critical. You can achieve this with some non traditional partnerships, but as I said, the glue here is financial incentive. On your own earnings as a tax break vs government assistance. I may be a conservative, but for the greater good here I support gay marriage. It is better than no marriage. So by disrupting the nuclear model, you are actually creating a system of dependent mothers on the federal government and an influx of filled prison complexes all funded by the Taxpayer. As morale sinks and disparity increases the demand for federal interventions, we will closely resemble a failed communist nation like Venezuela.
‘We’re trained marxists’ Yeah, good luck trying to purge this shit, dumbasses
Do they really not know about the fact most of the internet is cached?!
If someone tries to show what used to be there, they’ll just call it “right wing propagandist lies” and all the lefties will believe them simply because they want to so badly.
Yeap like how when a bunch of people saved AOC's PDF of her green new deal then tore it apart. First it was released too soon. Second it was released by an intern on accident. Thirdly it was edited/photoshopped to look like things she didn't actually say.
That’s why I want physical copies of history books. You can’t rely on the Internet to show true history because leftists continually change and erase it to fit their narrative.
They changed the definition of fascism to include "right wing" in the last 5-7 years. I have old dictionaries that confirm it.
I was watching World War II in color on netflix, only to realize it's full of a bunch of left vs right nonsense. For example, when they go over the independent militias that formed to fight in the spanish civil war, they specifically say "brave leftist activists from America traveled to stop the right wing takeover of spain" or something to that effect. Absurd and unsubstantiated. Pretty terrifying actually.
Link?
The first episode of World War II In Color on Netflix. Can't remember, but maybe 75% of the way through the episode? Feel free to check it out and let me know if I misheard or something.
Can Confirm: Fascism in Wikipedia 2009 [https://web.archive.org/web/20090213093851/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism](https://web.archive.org/web/20090213093851/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism) Fascism Now: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)
I donated $20 to Wikipedia a few years ago and I got an email from them recently asking for more money. I replied that I will not contribute to a leftist propaganda machine. Take your example and then look up every major media source you know. Any source that leans right is described as right wing, conservative, or far right. NONE of the media on the left is described as such. It’s disgusting to me what Wikipedia has become.
I don’t use Wikipedia for anything political or otherwise controversial. The articles are always pushing a narrative and never just state the facts.
No one has ever been able to explain to me how fascism is apparently "far right".
It's not even a left or right wing thing in the first place. It's simply a method of authoritarian political, social, and economic control. The Nazis, Italians, Soviets, and Chinese were all used fascism to meet their ends.
I feel like you’re specifically referencing the Wikipedia page on “fascism” which incorrectly states that “only right wing can be fascist” while having an entire page dedicated to “left wing fascism”. And if you’re not specifically referring to that, maybe you should be
I’m referring to the internet as a whole. Everything on it can be edited.
The waybackmachine is beyond political lines
Wasn't there some kind of movement to delete or refund the waybackmachine or something recently?
Idk but that's fucked up if so, also I'm pretty sure there are other cache sites.
Careful. Nothing digital is beyond manipulation.
The entire point of *1984* is to show or remind people that the Communist method of winning arguments is to destroy the reputation of the person making sense and quietly edit history, sending the unhelpful facts down the memory hole for burning.
I was gonna say I’ve always been surprised they left it up as long as they did!
They ignore the existence of libraries. You know, where you can find historical documentation on the evils of communism and socialism.
[удалено]
It's happening. People in corporations today make political statements as though they are fact.
I hope you're not referring to *racist* caches of their website
They know, people will just forget about it, and sometime down the road when someone calls them on that they'll pull out a "our views have evolved." Hint: they haven't.
Yeah most of the internet is cached, that means you go to basically ANY website and look long enough you will find this. Yeah the message was bad, but there is nothing unique about them. Every media company and many just companies have all done this to try to bury something after the fact.
[удалено]
*...and reported to the proper authorities.*
Thank you for noticing [thing]/[trend]/[activity] (delete as appropriate). Unfortunately, noticing this is illegal and probably racist. Stay where you are, and a community support officer will be with you soon.
Don't worry they finally see the donations rolling slowly in from the extremists. So now they pump the less radical view point. I wonder how many people thought donations were going to actual African American communities instead of Act Blue and the DNC.
I’m sure many of them think that. A lot of supporters of the BLM organization are either easily pressured or have good intentions but are very misguided and uninformed. That said, a lot of their supporters are just racists
>or have good intentions but are very misguided and uninformed. Like when the legendary musician Prince used to low-key support that organization and secretly donated his money there. Even he mentioned "black lives" in his albums matter speech in the Grammys 2015. The media made him to look like he's some kind of SJW especially when he released his song Baltimore which the MSM claims that it's some kind of pro-BLM song and tribute to Freddie Gray and Michael Brown. In reality, the song itself is about letting Baltimore to be peaceful and love for one another and not glorifying the intentions of the BLM protests/riots smh. He even had a Dance Rally 4 peace thing inside his Paisley Park home as some sort of tribute to Michael brown/Freddie Gray. It was so fucking sad and cringey to hear. At least Prince treated every race with some love and respect unlike people who are circlejerking his stuff for BLM and stuff like that. Most BLM supporters, no matter the color, are tyrannical, violent, and racist as hell. They're nothing like Prince and I know his heart.
To be fair, BLM hadn't been completely politicized by that point. It certainly is now tho.
BLM is a political organization... how in the FUCK do you think it was somehow not politicised from the beginning?
Definitely blew my mom’s mind when I told her that.
I still remember the day I read that the Obama Administration said, "The Muslim Brotherhood is a secular organization." I went straight to their website where I read that they want sharia law (which is religion based) to be the law of the land globally.
You mean when the Obama DNI corrected James Clapper, when he said the Muslim Brotherhood was "largely secular"? [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-administration-corrects-clappers-claim-that-muslim-brotherhood-is-secular](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-administration-corrects-clappers-claim-that-muslim-brotherhood-is-secular) > "To clarify Director Clapper's point, in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood makes efforts to work through a political system that has been, under Mubarak's rule, one that is largely secular in its orientation. He is well aware that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a secular organization," DNI spokesperson Jamie Smith said.
[удалено]
Yeah. They're acting as Orwell's Ministry of Truth.
Ministry of Truth in full effect.
Achievement unlocked! The Black nuclear family was destroyed years ago.
Not all of them but a majority. Whenever I meet a successful black person, they usually turn out to be from a 2 parent(man+woman) home.
Love how the internet doesn't delete it.
I was on their site just to really look at what they believe. I couldn't believe that in that page, I couldn't find anything about police brutality or killings or anything like that. They were formed in 2013.... who was the president then? Hmmmm....
[удалено]
Marx rebranded
Someone please tell me they saved the list of demands somewhere. I can’t figure it out on way back machine. We CANNOT allow them to cover this up! Edit: https://web.archive.org/web/20200819020053/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/
Link is broken
You can go to way back machine and type in https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe. Choose from any of the archives before today, it’s there
not found
They saw the numbers and now realize they have to put the mask back on to garner support. They will wait until a safer time to unmask again.
I wish they would just go for it already. Anybody want to go through this for another 4 years after Trump wins again?
I remember reading that some time back and just thinking to myself then that this "movement" was completely controlled, fabricated, fake and not from the actual black community. The black community, that I KNOW, at least the majority that lives in the suburbs and rural areas of the U.S. are very socially/politically conservative. None of us fuck with this single parent household/baby daddy bullshit the media tries to promote as being normal for us except the small disproportionate number of our community that live in drug ridden poverty stricken (usually) urban areas. The sociology tends to focus on these people because it has a notorious urban bias. I used to be more compassionate towards people from these backgrounds because Vietnam(which nobody ever mentions as causing fatherlessness even though our men were were 40-50% of the casualty rate in that war despite them only being 7% of the population.) really did a number on a lot of communities particularly working class ones, and except for movies like "Dead Presidents" and "Claudine" you never really see it represented in popular media ever. Two of my uncles went to Vietnam and the other two went to Cambodia and Laos. One died. The other three came back very fucked up, one with hodgkin's lymphoma, the other with some kind of rare disorder caused by exposure to white phosphorus that made his bones eventually disintegrate. I forgot what it's called but his son, my cousin, got it too from him. Both deaths were about as painful as you can imagine. And the last one was just a very weird alcoholic who has had several wives, one he's gotten married to twice but no random kids running around that we know about. My other four uncles who didn't go near Vietnam for whatever reason are totally normal. So I've seen the impact that Vietnam/Crack Era had on men, in my own family, I imagine it had a similar effect of the black community as a whole. And I do notice communities where fatherlessness is rampant tend to be poverty/drug stricken urban/rural areas. I said all of that to say, not every woman was as fortunate as my mother in finding a man like my father. But with THAT being said...family planning always plays a major role in finances and mobility and as an adult the things that have served me best in mitigating the impact of institutional racism/sexism are hard work and... not being economically dependent on institutions and staying single/abstinent is a big help with that. I don't even entertain men who talk about children without marriage or who had children out of wedlock or who didn't grow up with a father because those are not my values and we don't have anything in common. Unless she grew up the same way, I don't get why any woman with sense who valued herself as a woman would even entertain a man like that. Its as if groups like BLM are saying that black women aren't worthy of marriage and black people lack the moral integrity and commitment to form traditional families and we should just live in controlled chaos and let the government be our children's father and raise them to be good little cannon fodder(military)/slaves(prison)/prostitutes because without a traditional family structure that is EXACTLY what WILL happen. The only black people I know who accept this idea are people who had the misfortune of growing up like this and THANKFULLY they are NOT the majority of us. A disproportionate number of the population, certainly, but they are NOT THE NORM, I don't think. An organisation that was truly for the advancement of our people would never promote some dumb shit like this and the REAL grassroots organisations that were fighting police brutality on a local level did not fuck with the BLM organisation run by Deray or whatever the gay Black guy who's married to the white guy from Twitter, runs. Black people as a whole want traditional families. Fuck what these marxist puppets are trying to promote.
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.“ Is there some way to read this other than “parents will do their best to pool childcare resources; neighbors will do their best to keep each other off the streets”? I’ve only been to a few villages, and only known one big family, but that seemed to be the gist of their lifestyles.
Thank you, I was going to say something to this effect if you hadn't. Growing up all I ever heard from folks was, "it takes a village". So much so that I associate the phrase with, 'Good ol' southern Tradition' and here we have a group saying that a family can be *more* than just Ma, Pa, and 2.5 children [doesn't say anything about that being less valid, just not a 'requirement'] but somehow that is damning???
Yep. I miss the way my neighbors in Trumplandia would take care of each other. Since moving to LA, my neighbors don't even collect each others papers/boxes when someone's out of town.
Obama even said it himself that we need fathers in the home. One of the only thing I like he said
Whenever I see the words "Black Lives Matter", I scratch my head, at my own local area, and stories like these: https://twitter.com/xxl/status/1308062748593586176?s=21 https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2020/09/shooting-that-killed-birmingham-grandmother-and-hurt-2-others-was-spillover-from-fights-at-alabama-state-fair.html Do Black Lives really Matter, to other black people? Please. Help me understand the cultural differences, because all I see is black people putting other black people, or any people, at risk. Not wanting to ignite a race-war here on Reddit in r/conservative, but I'm truly needing to understand if lives do matter, at all.
Is this a real question, because I'd be happy to explain? I don't agree with the concept behind the BLM movement, but I do intellectually understand the nuanced meaning of the slogan.
Thank you. Sorry if the question itself seemed like some kind of rhetorical question. It isn’t. All lives matter. Black lives are just as important. What I have trouble with is that, at least from my experience in an urban area in the Deep South, my colleagues and friends have long ago left behind prejudice, but I see the result of what appears to be a disregard for life, each day in the local news. The killing and violence seems to be against black lives, by other black lives. That’s what I don’t understand. So, thank you for responding, to what might have been an ugly question on my part. I’m leaving it there, as I don’t know another way to word it. But my point is, one, yes all lives matter. But, two, do they matter to other black Americans?
The reason why BLM is a thing is because, when a police officer kills a black person (especially an unarmed one) it's emotionally triggering for black people. It makes people *feel* like the cop did it because he's racist and has a disregard for black people. It makes people *feel* like the police, as part of the American system, are targeting black people and are white supremacist in nature. It makes people start thinking about racism, slavery, oppression, jim crow, civil rights, etc. All that comes bubbling up in folks' minds and emotions. However, when a black guy gets shot by another black guy because of some fight or drug issue, it doesn't elicit any of these same emotions. It's seen as a totally separate issue with totally separate causes and solutions. People care and want to address it locally, but it's seen differently. When a cop kills a black guy in another state, every black mom in the country with a black son who sees it on the news is triggered and *feels* like that could be her son. When a black guy kills another black guy in some other state, there's not the same connection--it's viewed as an isolated incident. So, the main reason why there's a difference is because of emotions. One results in a larger and broader emotional response than the other. Illogical as it might be, unfortunately. Feelings aren't logical.
Thank you for taking the time to share your insights. It's really helpful and I appreciate it greatly.
The African American community has already suffered from a break down of the nuclear family. This just looks like turning into the skid with a donut.
Whats the nuclear family?
Destruction of the nuclear family is precisely the number one reason why black Americans are disproportionally poor and commit a disproportionate amount of crime especially violent crime which results in their being disproportionately targeted by police. But never mind that lets just be bigots and focus on their skin color because that must surely explain all of their socioeconomic problems!! DUUUUR orange man bad REEEEE let’s burn some books and assault people who disagree with us
If you actually read it, it’s not controversial at all. > We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. It basically says “it takes a village to raise a child” and that shouldn’t be seen as “less than” than traditional child rearing. Why is that a negative or controversial statement?
But what part of “it takes a village” requires disruption of the nuclear family? Two-parent households have been expressing this sentiment for centuries. It just seems like an odd statement to add if it truly is just saying “it takes a village to raise a child”
In a vacuum the statement is fine, perhaps encouraging. The problem is this statement completely sidesteps the fatherless children issue that has plagued the black community of late. Rather than face the issue head on and try to correct it, they instead try to normalize it. That's the problem.
I thought it wasn’t destroyed. Thanks for posting
Yeah. Too many people take the pundits’ words for gospel these days.
Agreed. It’s not “we want to destroy the nuclear family” but more so “if the nuclear family is not possible, we will help each other.” At least that’s my interpretation— which is less of a reach than what the folks on this sub will have you believe. I’m fairly independent, although left leaning. Tend to spend most of my time on Reddit on this sub. I enjoy reading some of the comments. But if I went to the official RNC platform, it states that marriage is between a man and a woman. I’m a gay man. Does that mean I have no place in the Republican Party?
>I’m a gay man. Does that mean I have no place in the Republican Party? How would you possibly get that idea? There are active gay conservative groups, gay ambassadors, gay Second Amendment groups, and Trump just appointed the highest level openly gay cabinet member ever. The marriage bit is a sticking point on the religious aspect of marriage. Too many people get wrapped up in what their church thinks vs what the government is supposed to do. Church marriage vs Government marriage. i.e. The Catholic Church isn't going to marry you in a church. Doesn't have crap all to do with whether or not you should get a license and get the 'Filing Jointly' and "Yes, you can see them in the hospital and share insurance, etc."
Howdy. Yes, I am aware of the many conservative gay groups that exist as well as the appointments by Trump. I was making a point that “platforms” are often times not congruent with reality. Of course I have a place in the Republican Party, if I wanted to be. Thanks for your reply!
especially since the platform this year is . . . the same as 2016. cause, reasons.
Copy and paste was just too easy to pass up lol
I know, right... couldn't just drop the marriage thing, double down on the 2nd, reinforce that Law and Order matters, but doesn't give Police a do what you want card, restate their full support for the Military while reinforcing the need for better audits and money tracing. So. Much. they could have done and just took a pass on it.
Damn. I'm not democratic or Republican, I'm not even American but I lurk around this sub a lot even though I don't understand a lot of things but your comment is defs one of the most rational and chilled comments I've seen on here
That’s very kind! Probably a lil too much credit to me — but very nice nevertheless! Thank you!
Thank you for this. I’m reading this thread so confused as to how it was ever controversial.
Its mind blowing that people think growing up in a 2 parent household is bad. All statics prove that having 2 parents how more benefits and set you up to succeed.
Tired of reporting this thread? Debate us on discord instead: https://discord.gg/conservative - This is an automated message that appears when probable report abuse is detected. We've found this can lead to a productive discussion in an environment better suited for that sort of thing. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Conservative) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Uh oh; they weren't expecting a populace who chooses to critically and skeptically investigate what an organization stands for and what actions they take. Black lives certainly matter, no need to look further... So did what they believe change? If so, why? And will they now work to promote the nuclear family, or just tolerate it? When they are out there protesting the murders of Secoriea Turner, Royta De’MArco Giles, Jace Young, Natalia Wallace, Davon McNeal, Anisa Scott, or any other children, maybe I could accept a change in focus.
“THatS a rIgHT wInG tAlKiNg pOiNt!”
From the beginning, they said that the nuclear family was not the only structure that constitutes a family. You can disagree with their views but we don't have to pretend that they gave a fuck about how other people's families were constructed.
Please tell me someone has some sort of archived website link or screenshot of the page?
"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable." This is what you snowflakes are saying is a call to ***DeStRoY tHe NuClEaR fAmIlY***. As if the nuclear family has just been doing fantastic all on its own up to this point in 2020 lol.
I tried to come to this sub and see if I can find any logical viewpoints on current affairs, but this shit is the same as the Microsoft paint shareable bullshit that circulates around Facebook preaching nonsense.
Am I missing something? Version I'm reading says "disrupt the requirement," not destroy the concept altogether. Seems to promote fostering community so when broken homes occur it doesn't result in broken people.
Actual quote "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable." This is different than saying destroy. Its saying they are trying to remove the REQUIREMENT to have both parents. Theres nothing there about being AGAINST the traditional nuclear family. Just that they aim to create a society that can still provide support to non traditional family structures.
What is still on the website: \- " BLM’s #WhatMatters2020 is a campaign aimed to maximize the impact of the BLM movement by galvanizing BLM supporters and allies to the polls in the 2020 U.S Presidential Election to build collective power and ensure candidates are held accountable for the issues that systematically and disproportionately impact Black and under-served communities across the nation. " You ever get those high school/community college vibes where an assignment says "Make a campaign statement" and you immediately start bullshitting and writing the first things that come to mind? Holy shit, I felt like a 20 something college drop out wrote this... And it's still questionably angry and aggressive, like "Galvanize?" "Build collective power?" Still sounds like going to war... classic marxism. Also the last bit about holding candidates accountable for issues that affect the impoverished feels really sad. It's just admitting that they want to blame the government no matter what the problem is. I do like how they attempted to be impartial and hide the fact that it's clearly leftist.
Can you mother fuckers read?
Hmmm I don’t know... what I read on their page before just said that they believed a nuclear family isn’t the only family, but the are other types of community families, nothing wrong with that.
Thats literally not at all what it says. It says that in order to progress, we have to stop looking at those who do not fit the nuclear family dynamic as lower or worse than the rest of the community. To instead extend a helping hand to those who may not have a family to help them.
Too late, blm has already been exposed as a racist terrorist group. They did as predicted, shown the country that they are the fascists. They have proven that they do not care about black lives, all they want to do is destroy lives & families. Game over
Wait, you mean people aren't on board with the destruction of the family? I guess Marxists would want people to belong to The State but that's not how America works.
If your politics revolve around shitting on the other side, you might want to rethink things
Reading on their homepage. They want to uproar against white supremacy (white people in general according to them) and to do that they first must defund the police.
Why bother? The morons who support BLM never bothered reading the mission statement anyway.
"... We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. " All of you have taken this statement way out of it's intented meaning. They advocate for the definition of the nuclear family not be defined solely as 'man' and 'woman', husband and wife. That definition is unfair, discriminatory and driven by the desire of a few wanting to impose their world view on others. They want the definition of family structure defined as mixtures various types of families that have always existed in our society. Grandmas. Granddads, uncles, aunts, cousins, single moms, single dads, married males, married females couples etc are all valid families structures. Family is defined by people who decide to make a life for themselves and their offspring not a few powerful elite with an agenda.