People aren't mad that black people had the nerve to proclaim their lives matter. Most I know wouldn't have said otherwise. They simply point out the problem with the usual leftwing duplicity behind it all. That is, insisting they aren't saying only black lives matter, and then watching them suggest anyone who says all lives matter is a racist.
The Left's favorite tactic of denying having stated the implicit truth they just used to separate the sheep from the greatest of all time, is the problem. And pardon me for noticing, but the only one who seems mad about any of this is Ms. Harris.
"Black Lives Matter" promotes the notion that blacks are in danger from police officers. Police killings average about 350 a year in this country (out of 16,000 homicides in a typical year) and the black proportion thereof does not exceed the share of criminal offenders who are black. As stated, it's a nonsense complaint.
ReplyDeleteNote, the organization was founded in response to the Zimmerman-Martin affair. George Zimmerman shot a youth who attacked him and was banging his head into the concrete. This gets to the real point of 'black lives matter'. The complaint here isn't that blacks are in danger, but that blacks are subject to the authority of people of lower status. Black chauvinists like this woman fancy blacks are a sort of aristocratic stratum and white leftists fancy they distribute status and their mascots are of higher status than deplorables. Police officers and local randos like George Zimmerman are getting above their station when they make arrests, question people, report incidents, and forcibly defend themselves.
I've seen many sources bring out the numbers that debunk the BLM narrative, but it's a narrative that has been accepted as gospel truth nonetheless. The way the press covered it, or rather promoted it, was by conflating 'a thousand' blacks shot by police in a given year with the claim that the number of unarmed blacks killed by the police has been growing. Those are the only two things close to an actual stat or number I heard during the BLM reported by the press.
DeleteIf you want to really understand how numbers are used by the left and the press (sorry for repeating myself) look at the interview between Don Lemon and Sheriff David Clarke. Don Lemon uses a Harvard study to say that blacks are at higher risk of being shot than whites. David Clarke responds that he has also read the study and while it showed some higher levels of police aggression in incidents with blacks where there was no violence, it actually did not show differences in incidents where the police shot someone. (I've seen the study and this is accurate, by the way.) Don Lemon immediately says that the study had a horrible sample size and shouldn't be relied on by anyone (despite this being a study that he introduced into the conversation!) To make things even more ridiculous in that same interview Lemon tried to use that exact same study again to prove that cops were racist against blacks.
DeleteStatistics are only there to dress up the approved conclusion and as a rhetorical device to sway the opinions of people not paying attention. The left has literally no care whatsoever about whether they are true or not, just whether they are useful. But usually they dress it up better than Don Lemon did in that interview, because very few people are as dumb as he is.
This is exactly where the "It's Okay to Be White" meme works great.
ReplyDeleteIn theory all a leftist needs to say is "Who's saying that it isn't okay to be white?" and that's the end of it. But they never do.
No, they don't. Increasingly I fear it's because they absolutely disagree with the idea that it's Okay to be white.' At least be white if your witness hasn't been purified by the saving grace of the Left.
Delete