Black Lives Matter get police float kicked out of Pride Parade

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Okay but do we determine what's fair without any historical or social context?

Who said anything about abandoning historical or social context. Liberals certainly don't have to.

Originally Posted by rubecube

That's the problem I have with the liberal approach. It claims objectivity but then abandons objective information when the info doesn't conform to its ideals.

I don't think liberalism actually claims objectivity, just that what's objectively true has the best chance of winning out in the long term when freedom of speech, association, and assembly are maintained.

That being said, I do think that liberals are less likely to abandon objective information when the info doesn't conform to ideals than most modern progressives and conservatives. This is primarily because one of the liberal ideals is to avoid doing that, something that progressivism (especially the part that hold to a form of relativism) and conservatism don't hold to as strongly.

I do see a lot of progressives get upset when liberals don't accept statistics that are poorly substantiated though. The extremely poorly substantiated 1 in 4 women get raped in college stat for example.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

Who said anything about abandoning historical or social context. Liberals certainly don't have to.

Well we're getting into broad strokes here and it's definitely something I've seen argued by liberals.

I do see a lot of progressives get upset when liberals don't accept statistics that are poorly substantiated though. The extremely poorly substantiated 1 in 4 women get raped in college stat for example.

To be fair, that's 1 in 4 women get sexually assaulted which can have a broad definition depending on which study you're looking at. But yeah, I agree that there's a problem with progressives who put out statistics that lack context or haven't been properly vetted.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This is one of the biggest mistakes of the identity politics movement - attaching themselves to every cause that seeks to undermine the status quo.

This is less an identity politics thing than it is a queer identity thing in an existential/community sense, at least from the few people I've heard from on the subject.

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well we're getting into broad strokes here and it's definitely something I've seen argued by liberals.

Sure, but my point is that there's nothing core to liberalism that demands it. That many liberals do so to varying degrees, is not the same thing as saying it's part of being liberal/moderate.

It's like saying that progressives are Marxist. The are progressives that are Marxist, and many more that argue for some of it's core principles, but it's not core to the ideology.

Originally Posted by rubecube

To be fair, that's 1 in 4 women get sexually assaulted which can have a broad definition depending on which study you're looking at. But yeah, I agree that there's a problem with progressives who put out statistics that lack context or haven't been properly vetted.

Yes, I know that, but too many people who cited these studies then claimed specifically that 1 in 4 were raped as though it was the same thing, only to cry foul when moderates pointed out correctly that that's not what the studies said.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

Sure, but my point is that there's nothing core to liberalism that demands it. That many liberals do so to varying degrees, is not the same thing as saying it's part of being liberal/moderate.

Well that's the theory vs. practice debate I was talking about earlier, and I think you could apply it to progressives and conservatives, too. Do you define them by their intentions/actions or what they espouse in academia, etc.?

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well that's the theory vs. practice debate I was talking about earlier, and I think you could apply it to progressives and conservatives, too. Do you define them by their intentions/actions or what they espouse in academia, etc.?

It definitely applies to progressives and conservatives too. I'm more making a distinction between core principles and the theory/practice that comes out of it than the distinction between theory and practice itself.

There is a lot of diversity among every political camp regarding both the theory and practice, even if there is general agreement about some central guiding principles. I think that the big tent labels come down to the core values, and the smaller tents within them come down to the particular theories and practices.

Consider, for example, how liberal principles are core to both modern social liberalism and libertarian-ism. The social liberal believes in strong social safety nets and complex social support systems to help level the playing field when it comes to taking advantage of opportunity and thereby increase liberty and personal freedom for the most in that way, while the libertarian thinks that personal freedom and liberty are maximized by limiting regulations and social safety nets to a simple guaranteed basic income that the receiver can spend how he or she wishes.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

A bit of a buzzkill to BLM and lots of others who derive heir self worth by fighting for their race, but the us has a social mobility problem that is masked by what most people think of as a race problem.

You don't think the fact that black people are more likely to be poor is a race problem?

[sworkhard]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You don't think the fact that black people are more likely to be poor is a race problem?

I would say that what's holding back poor black people are 1. Poverty. 2. Culture. 3. Racism. In that order.

I would say why they are poor is similar to the reason the so called white trash are poor. Historical racism, slavery/indentured servitude, and a general lack of availability of quality education in the areas that they dominate today.

I say this in part because middle class black people don't report anywhere near the discrimination that poor black people do, and middle class black people who grew up in primarily white areas report almost none.

Further, I cannot think of anything that would do more to reduce racism against black people than for them to escape poverty in large numbers and make up a proportionate amount of the skilled labor force.

I suspect Flames in 07 thinks similarly.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You don't think the fact that black people are more likely to be poor is a race problem?

Here is some science for you. You need to do 3 things and the likely hood of living in poverty is greatly reduced.

1. Graduate High School
2. Don't have kids before marriage
3. Get a job

I guess one thing that doesn't matter much is stay off drugs...but the crack epidemic of the 80's decimated American inner cities and a people who already still recovering from the shackles of civil rights.

Ending racism doesn't stop proverty - there are other much bigger factors at play and those need to be addressed - keep beating a dead horse and you'll get nowhere

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don't think there is anything wrong with the family side of things and I apologise if you think I'm being a jerk. For the record, I think you're one a lot too. That's what happens when two people passionately disagree on almost everything.

The BLM protest was meant to inject current politics into an event that has essentially lost any relevant political meaning. There is a large issue that BLM looked to address regarding the community, and I feel it was educational. You might not like it, but then you wouldn't have liked the Pride parade in the beginning, would you have?

BLM didn't ruin anything. They were invited, they took their stand, they attempted change through force. That has happened many times in the gay community, and it's respectable.

The Pride parade shouldn't always just be a hunky dory family parade with a bit of flair. It should be a vessel for political change too, even if it's political change within the community it originated from.

And that's all I have to say about it.

Lost any relevant political meaning? You cannot be serious. There was a bloody massacre in Orlando targeting the gay community! For several years now, ive been of the opinion that the gay community had finally been accepted as a part of the community. Orlando changed all that. They are absolutely a community and minority at risk. For BLM to hijack the event is disgusting.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

This is the whitest thing I have ever read on this forum.

Enlighten us, and please try to provide recent examples.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Lost any relevant political meaning? You cannot be serious. There was a bloody massacre in Orlando targeting the gay community! For several years now, ive been of the opinion that the gay community had finally been accepted as a part of the community. Orlando changed all that. They are absolutely a community and minority at risk. For BLM to hijack the event is disgusting.

Hyperbole alert!
Come on now, One idiot doesn't change that.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

[B]Well according to anti-BLM voices, this doesn't happen in the USA either. They always deserve it.[B]

Much like the high incarceration (or "missing") rates for Natives in Canada. Or the fact that police suspect shootings have jumped massively in the last 5 years, and that those shot are predominantly people of color.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cers_in_Canada

No, it's not as bad as it is in the US, but using the USA as a metric for shootings is a pretty poor choice IMO.

Way to sidestep the question.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Enlighten us, and please try to provide recent examples.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...192840113.html

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Hyperbole alert!
Come on now, One idiot doesn't change that.

Yeah I think it does

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...192840113.html

And the practice was ended, and ironically enough, violent crime, shootings, and gang activity increased!

[dissentowner]

I will just post this here. A black man pulled over for a broken headlight.

http://fox61.com/2015/10/29/mans-fac...op-goes-viral/

TUCSON, Ariz. — A man’s Facebook post about a recent traffic stop is going viral.

Steven Hildreth Jr. says he was pulled over by the Tucson Police Department for a broken headlight. When the officer asked if he had any weapons, he told him he is a concealed carry permit holder and had a gun on his right hip.

Because his wallet was in his back-right pocket, the officer needed to disarm him to check his ID. Hildreth wrote about his experience with the officer and posted it to his Facebook page.

I am sure you have already come to a conclusion of how this will go down reading that quote. Now read his post.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I will just post this here. A black man pulled over for a broken headlight.

http://fox61.com/2015/10/29/mans-fac...op-goes-viral/



I am sure you have already come to a conclusion of how this will go down reading that quote. Now read his post.

This is no place for common sense...we want blood

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Lost any relevant political meaning? You cannot be serious. There was a bloody massacre in Orlando targeting the gay community! For several years now, ive been of the opinion that the gay community had finally been accepted as a part of the community. Orlando changed all that. They are absolutely a community and minority at risk. For BLM to hijack the event is disgusting.

So, because you falsely believed the struggle was over for the LGBTQ community and were reminded that "Hey, life isn't always fantastic when you're gay," suddenly the Pride events have meaning to you? That's fantastic.

The Orlando shooting had zero impact on the level of acceptance I feel. That being: A comfortable amount of acceptance with more strides to make. This was one psycho who targeted the LGBTQ community. ISIS? Homophobe? Gay man with a vendetta? I'm not really concerned with the why anymore. It happened, we move forward, it most DEFINITELY did NOT move us backward.

My point is that the Pride parades don't really mean much anymore, certainly not what they did, and now there is very little political significance to marching in one. As has been pointed out, it's now used more as a way to save face with the gay community in general, even when your voting patterns don't indicate you truly support gay rights.

I stand by thinking that BLM stood for the right things. We're they bullish and callous about it? Sure, but LGBTQ history is riddled with radical activists. The Pride parade was designed to remember them! It was a good time and a good place to bring some issues forward regarding treatment of people of colour within the gay community.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Yeah I think it does

Ya I don't think so.