Sunday, July 17, 2016


There are two primary views concerning objection to the slogan Black Lives Matter.  The one, which we should all reject, is based in the ignorance of racism.  But the second is based on the view we must start to view the greater issue of ignorance and bigotry and move to a thought process of all lives matter.  Racism is based in the idea that we are not all the same, so the slogan Black Lives Matter only reinforces our division rather than promoting unity.

The self anointed leaders of this movement and many of its followers get all upset when you raise black on black violence.  Every time a little black child is killed in a drive by shooting, it is a tragedy which befalls our entire nation.

We as a nation, but with blacks leading the battle call, must address the issue of black on black violence.

President Obama proved a black man can rise to the highest position of power in the U.S. I know it is not so simple.  He had advantages other blacks do not have.   But this applies to all groups equally.

Michelle Obama and Associate Supreme Court Justice Thomas both experienced the same racial discrimination in college but chose opposing paths in how to deal with it.

Both complained that Anglos viewed them as only being at their respective undergraduate and law schools because of affirmative action and not because they were smart.  We cannot say to either of them that the racism was not real.  It was very real.

You will never convince me racial profiling is not real.  On the way back from NY, a couple were complaining about two Sikh men on the plane, assuming they were terrorists.  They did not outright say it, but they implied it with their words.  This couple is so ignorant they are unaware Sikhs are not Muslims.  But commenting about Muslim men being on the plane would have been equally wrong.

Early this week I read an article of a former black literature teacher being questioned in Canada for the crime of reading in his car while watching the waves break on the shore.   An Anglo couple called it in.  In that case the officer apologized, but noted they have to respond to complaints.

Yes we have some - only a few bad officers.  But that does not justify a movement which creates a division between our law enforcement and society.  Creating divisions never help anyone.

I am not dismissing the problem - it is all too real.  But it has reached the point that law enforcement is finding it increasingly hard to do their job without being accused of racial profiling.

Sometime ago I posted a video taken by a black bystander filming a black officer kicking an Anglo homeless man to get him to move on.  I love this video because the bystander as a black man verbally took down the black officer - why?  because independent of race he was wrong and the life of this homeless Anglo man matters.


Having seen on the news many of the marches involving Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., early in life I started to ask the question of why we have to view each other as separate.  This mindset lead me into eventually becoming a classically trained socialist.  You cannot be a socialist and support Black Lives Matter - you can claim to be a socialist but you are not.


In the mid-80's when I raised the issue of bisexuality at a Dallas Gay Alliance meeting I was labelled sick and in denial.  There was no such thing as bisexuality according to the Dallas Gay Alliance.  You have no idea how many years of infighting it took to change the name to the Dallas Gay and Lesbian Alliance.

While in NY with a transgender niece and a non-binary nephew I discussed the issue of labeling.  They both agreed the labels only serve to emphasis our differences rather than what makes us all the same, but my nephew pointed out that so long as discrimination exists, we need the labels to identify the victims of discrimination.  I responded with, until we see each other as all equal labels will be needed.  But we must move beyond labels, while acknowledging bigotry of all sorts exist.

We do this best by acknowledging All Lives Matter and marching in unity to All Lives Matter while showing zero tolerance for those who seek to promote discrimination against anyone - period.

A true rainbow march will do more to bring awareness to the problem than a march which highlights only one group.


Anonymous said...

Agree, All Lives Matter

Anonymous said...

I would rather the slogan say, "Black Lives Matter Too." While I agree that all lives matter, history has shown that white lives have mattered more. We don't need a reminder that white lives matter, because they always have. It's all the other lives that haven't mattered. In a perfect society, all lives matter. We are a long way from there. Europeans took this land from the Native Americans, enslaved black people, disenfranchised people of color for way too long. We had the civil rights movement decades ago that afforded more rights to people of color but I won't be naive enough to believe those rights matter to everyone. Otherwise, we wouldn't have white supremacists. Racism is still alive and well and that is not an indictment on law enforcement, but on everyone that still appreciates the privilege that being white provides while not being bothered that the notion that "All men are created equal" is one of the biggest lies in our nation's troubled history (shame on the founding fathers for penning such a statement that they knew did not apply to non-whites!). Why should people of color have to fight for equal rights when they should be automatically afforded to them? People of color still do not get treated equally despite the decades that have past since the civil rights movement. You can lead the white people to water, but you can't make them (me) drink. We celebrate the civil rights movement now, but really we (myself included) should be ashamed that it took people of color dying to get those rights! That's why I think the slogan and the movement is important. But we shouldn't even have to have this conversation because they should be treated as equals, yet they are not. I look forward to the day when everyone truly embraces the notion that all lives matter, until then, I will afford people of color their constitutional right to continue to peacefully protest and start movements. Just because we say, "All men are created equal" doesn't mean we really believe it.

Anonymous said...

This was evidenced the other day when Newt Gingrich said that those who believe in Sharia law should be deported. He makes freedom of religion specifically and freedom of thought in general a qualified freedoms. You are free to worship and think as you please as long as it is the way I worship and the way I think or, at least, as long as it is a religion or a thought I approve of. As an aside -- I know all freedom is qualified freedom. You are not free to do whatever you want but you should be free to think whatever you want without consequence and you should be free to discuss what you think without consequences. Sharia law should be practiced in the U.S. with the same constraints as any other religion. You can not violate the law in the practice of your religion. This means you can't have multiple wives (are you listening, fundamental Mormons?), you can't stone people to death and so on. You can believe you should do it, you just can't do it.
If we, as a country, decide that Islam is a religion that is so evil it can not be tolerated in the U.S. then ban it's practice (as if you can ban an idea) but never again express that the country is a country that offers freedom of religion or freedom from religious persecution. I mean, change the constitution, update the history books, alter the laws to reflect the reality. Put out a list of accepted religions. It is pretty scary when a viable vice-presidential candidate suggests what Gingrich suggested.

Anonymous said...

What is scary is how intelligent views about laws, freedom, racism, etc. are not part of the political discussion. What you hear are statements such as "I'm voting for Trump because he is pro-gun." I guess some people's lives are so comfortable that the only thing left to worry about is not being able to own and open-carry a semi-automatic assault-type rifle with extra-capacity magazines.
All Texas voters with a conscience should vote third-party candidate for president.