Black Lives Matter as a slogan [POLL]

[Abdul-Hadi 1,292]

^ what we mean when we say nuclear family is really "traditional family" ie: man + woman, married, children. This is what these leftist groups in America are working to undermine and destroy. They don't want straight people getting married & they absolutely don't want people having children because this reminds the LMNOPeople that procreation is only possible through heterosexual relations... and that regardless of how angry that makes them, that there is literally nothing they can do about it.

That's why. Everything has to be "inclusive" of alternative lifestyles, which reality isn't & I'm not apologizing for how Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) created humans; so these types have become my adversaries now that they are trying to completely unmake & destroy the traditional family structure, replacing it with gay adoptions, lesbian "throuples", and the whole travesty that is the "trans movement".

Nope, I'm standing strong against this and I don't care what they do to me.

[Guest trap!Monad]

conundrum.

BLM - True -

ALM - True -

DLM - True or False and in what context.

ohh what is DLM?? huh! -

How would all of the above work in according to economics. Discrinimation, gender, age, racism are part of monetary value. How do we determine who gets the larger piece of the pie.

https://www.econlib.org/library/Topics/College/whatiseconomics.html

[Northwest 245]

18 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Most Muslims are pretty racist anyway, better to stand with those kinds of people than the psychotic pro-lgtb, anti nuclear family, black supremacist nut jobs from blm

I am currently trying to become more racist, anticommunist, and masculine in opposition to my effeminate liberal-leftist family. I think we need more white-supremacist religious traditionalists to counter the far-left racial minorities and their sexual degeneracy. These groups are part of a plot to destroy Western civilisation and illustrate why women’s rights, civil rights, etc. were all just a communist and Masonic plot against religious orthodoxy. After all, Islam does endorse slavery within an Islamic context and is diametrically opposed to democracy, feminism, communism, sexual degeneracy, and the like.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Northwest

[Ali_Hussain 6,042]

13 minutes ago, Northwest said:

I am currently trying to become more racist, anticommunist, and masculine in opposition to my effeminate liberal-leftist family. I think we need more white-supremacist religious traditionalists to counter the far-left racial minorities and their sexual degeneracy. These groups are part of a plot to destroy Western civilisation and illustrate why women’s rights, civil rights, etc. were all just a communist and Masonic plot against religious orthodoxy. After all, Islam does endorse slavery within an Islamic context and is diametrically opposed to democracy, feminism, communism, sexual degeneracy, and the like.

You are obviously a deviant, keep your sarcasm to yourself please. Anyone who reads the BLM manifesto can see that it is antithetical to the norms and values prescribed by Islam, as is their approach to racism and oppression and generalisations with regards to who the supposed racists and oppressors are.

Racism by Muslims isn't good, but it is not worse than the racism of 'white' people, people's prejudices seem to be a reality of life whereas the rubbish BLM calls for certainly is not. They only think black lives matter when it is a 'white' person doing the killing, when 'whites' or Asians or Arabs are targeted by African-Americans they don't care and the most certainly don't care when 'blacks' kill other 'blacks' they are a joke. Alhamdulillah that we have a religion that teaches us the difference between right and wrong.

 

Edited June 13, 2020 by Ali_Hussain

[Northwest 245]

12 minutes ago, Ali_Hussain said:

You are obviously a deviant, keep your sarcasm to yourself please.

No, I am not being sarcastic. Please keep the fake politeness “please” to yourself, old man.

If you wonder why I am being rude, it is because you basically told me to shut up.

Quote

Anyone who reads the BLM manifesto can see that it is antithetical to the norms and values prescribed by Islam, as is their approach to racism and oppression and generalisations with regards to who the supposed racists and oppressors are.

Racism by Muslims isn't good, but it is not worse than the racism of 'white' people, people's prejudices seem to be a reality of life whereas the rubbish BLM calls for certainly is not. They only think black lives matter when it is a 'white' person doing the killing, when 'whites' or Asians or Arabs are targeted by African-Americans they don't care and the most certainly don't care when 'blacks' kill other 'blacks' they are a joke.

Exactly my point as well. Blacks do this far more often than any other group yet whine about special privileges.

We pretty much share the same views on this matter and others: anticommunism, anti-feminism, anti-degeneracy.

Why do you seem rather defensive?

Edited June 13, 2020 by Northwest

[Northwest 245]

At age two, my fitrah was destroyed by a vaccine that gave me jinn. I was diagnosed with high-functioning autism at age five. I was born to far-left secular parents in the West. I have only started to consider reverting this year, after much research, but I still list myself as “agnostic” and “seeking” because I want to be 100% sure and committed before making the plunge, so to speak. I am a very bad person of bad lineage, however, which (further) complicates matters. Under Islam my family would be killed. I had very bad morality before attempting to revert, even though I never committed crimes, consumed hard drugs, or engaged in zina. I am currently living with my in a rural area of Scandinavia. I see that it is very difficult for me to fit in, owing to my background, and I am exceedingly sensitive for a man of my age. If anyone wants to verify my identity, feel free to contact me via Skype. I could give you my Skype username via PM upon request. I am already close to tears at this moment. Although I am twenty-seven years old, I never really learned how to be a man, given my upbringing. It is hard to learn entirely by myself, in isolation, and my family is not the place to start. I wish someone could adopt me.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Northwest

[Revert1963 717]

1 hour ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Anyone who reads the BLM manifesto can see that it is antithetical to the norms and values prescribed by Islam,

Couldn't you be a little more pragmatic? The BLM movement needs support so it can destroy America for us. Need I remind you of the old slogan from the Iranian revolution that I dare not spell out in fear of getting my final warning and being banned?

[Revert1963 717]

2 hours ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

what we mean when we say nuclear family is really "traditional family" ie: man + woman, married, children.

I think what Notme is saying is that the "traditional Muslim family" consist of : man + woman, [+ woman [+ woman [+ woman]]], children, Grandmother, Grandfather, Great grandmother, Grate grandfather, Uncle[, Uncle++], Aunt[, Aunt++], nice, nephew. So you see it is not only LGBT+ that has got a (+) in it.

[hasanhh 10,046]

5 hours ago, notme said:

^ "Nuclear family" is a recent invention, meant to increase the number of households, therefore increase required consumption of resources. "Nuclear family", that is, mom, dad, and 2 children, is not the only acceptable, nor even the best family structure. Grandparents and unmarried adult children do not need to be their own household unless they prefer it. 

When the term "nuclear family" bagan in the 1970s, it meant the family of four.

[Soldiers and Saffron 6,732]

3 hours ago, Northwest said:

At age two, my fitrah was destroyed by a vaccine that gave me jinn. I was diagnosed with high-functioning autism at age five. I was born to far-left secular parents in the West. I have only started to consider reverting this year, after much research, but I still list myself as “agnostic” and “seeking” because I want to be 100% sure and committed before making the plunge, so to speak. I am a very bad person of bad lineage, however, which (further) complicates matters. Under Islam my family would be killed. I had very bad morality before attempting to revert, even though I never committed crimes, consumed hard drugs, or engaged in zina. I am currently living with my in a rural area of Scandinavia. I see that it is very difficult for me to fit in, owing to my background, and I am exceedingly sensitive for a man of my age. If anyone wants to verify my identity, feel free to contact me via Skype. I could give you my Skype username via PM upon request. I am already close to tears at this moment. Although I am twenty-seven years old, I never really learned how to be a man, given my upbringing. It is hard to learn entirely by myself, in isolation, and my family is not the place to start. I wish someone could adopt me.

Dont worry brother, if you ask Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to help you and guide you, then surely He is the generous one and if you seek for a role model or even a father figure, see to Ali ibn abu Taleb(عليه السلام) who was called the father of orphans, see to Rasulullah(S) who had the patience and fortitude to deal with all the hatred the arabs of old threw at him.

Your lineage does not define you, there has been people from the best of lineages who have commited the worst of actions and there has been people from bad lineages who have commited the best of actions. So your actions define you. I am born in Sweden and have been raised here, so maybe I can understand your situation and your surroundings, feel free to PM me if you want.

[notme 20,630]

2 hours ago, Revert1963 said:

I think what Notme is saying is that the "traditional Muslim family" consist of : man + woman, [+ woman [+ woman [+ woman]]], children, Grandmother, Grandfather, Great grandmother, Grate grandfather, Uncle[, Uncle++], Aunt[, Aunt++], nice, nephew. So you see it is not only LGBT+ that has got a (+) in it.

Pretty much, yes. I was thinking of elders and adult children sharing the family home, but yes definitely "nuclear family" excludes men having more than one wife. Islam allows but does not require "nuclear family". 

[Silas 453]

BLM was created by three women who were leaders of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), which is funded by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)

The organization also gets funding from George Soros and Zionist groups

There ultimate aim is violent revolution and the overthrow of both church and state. It has very little to do with racial inequality or police reform

They have been in my town in the US and have ripped it up several times, assaulting people, burning stores, looting, threatening cops, etc. These are NOT good people, and none of this is consistent with Islam. It is the fringe of identity politics. 

[Hameedeh 19,976]

1 hour ago, Silas said:

BLM was created by three women who were leaders of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), which is funded by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)

The organization also gets funding from George Soros and Zionist groups

There ultimate aim is violent revolution and the overthrow of both church and state. It has very little to do with racial inequality or police reform

They have been in my town in the US and have ripped it up several times, assaulting people, burning stores, looting, threatening cops, etc. These are NOT good people, and none of this is consistent with Islam. It is the fringe of identity politics. 

I thought Black Lives Matter was a popular slogan. I had no idea that it was an actual organization with such a history. 

[hasanhh 10,046]

1 hour ago, Silas said:

BLM was created by three women who were leaders of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), which is funded by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)

This explains the broad cultural attacks. l was listening to the radio and at one point the radio-host was listing attacks on Christopher Colombus (the man who discovered the Carribbean and what is now ~Guyanna on his 3rd voyage and ~Panama on his 4th).

l was thinking today, this is a lot like the early Cultural Revolution.

[Hameedeh 19,976]

On 5/30/2020 at 8:07 PM, Brother Hassan said:

BLM is a general slogan used by many. Any group that claims the name doesn't speak for everyone who uses the slogan.

Thank you. That was what I was thinking. Probably most people thought that, because they never heard of a BLM organization run by communists or zionists.  

[Soldiers and Saffron 6,732]

 

 

 

 

[Haydar Husayn 10,222]

On 5/29/2020 at 2:45 AM, notme said:

The question misses the point. 

The Black Lives Matter movement does not say, never did say that only black lives matter. There movement was formed to remind us that Black Lives Matter too. 

The reacttionary "all lives matter" motto expresses satisfaction with the status quo including police brutality against black men, and often indicates thinly veiled racism. 

So yes, while indeed all lives do matter, if that's the goal, the BLM movement is the one that is working toward that. I fully support the Back Lives Matter movement and condemn all forms of personal or systemic racism. As a white person, I am probably unaware of a lot of the racism that goes on, but if made aware I will always condemn it. 

The Quran clearly states that no man or woman is superior or inferior due to his birth, but only through deeds can a person become a better human being. 

You fully support a movement you later admit to knowing nothing about. As Muslims, we should all support fighting against injustice and racism, but we should be a bit better than the common people who jump on any passing bandwagon that stirs their emotions. Just because we have one thing in common with Black Lives Matter, it doesn't mean we should support them, when the rest of their agenda is completely toxic and will in fact cause damage to Black lives (as well as everyone else's).

Regarding what the Qur'an says, I believe what you are referring to is:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا ۚ إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ - 49:13

O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted. [Qur'an 49:13]

The focus on the Qur'an here is on taqwa, which is partly about good deeds, but mainly about God-consciousness (taqwa). The Black Lives Matter movement is about as far removed from God-consciousness as you can imagine.

On 5/29/2020 at 9:45 PM, notme said:

No. Their ideology is simply that it's not ok to assign less value to the life of a person simply because he is black. Their goal is to draw attention to racial injustice. If you are Muslim, there is no other side that is acceptable. It's pretty simple. Either you value human lives or you are wrong..

Why do you make claims about their ideology when you haven't looked into it? You can't extrapolate an ideology from a slogan.

On 5/30/2020 at 6:29 PM, notme said:

While indeed there have been buildings and police cars destroyed or damaged by protesters, there is now credible speculation that a lot of the damage to private property has been committed by outsiders who are not affiliated with the protesters, either to make the protesters look bad or to profit from tragedy. 

We should stand on the side of justice.  Always.  You're going to have to use your own judgement.

What makes that speculation 'credible'? Those making these accusations see Russians and neo-nazis everywhere, and are completely deranged.

If these 'outsiders' have no affiliation with the movement, then why are so many supporters of the movement defending their actions?

For example:

Quote

But what if property destruction is more than an understandable lapse of judgment and loss of control? What if it is not a frustrated, emotional reaction but a reasonable and articulate expression in itself? The destruction is too widespread to attribute it to a few bad actors, and in some cases—such as the attacks on the CNN headquarter and the widespread vandalism of Confederate monuments—too precise and symbolically potent to be attributed solely to an opportunistic “criminal” element. The fantasy of outside agitators—a perennial feature of politicians’ responses to radical political action—is a means of presenting the real threat posed by mass actions as something foreign to the action itself.

https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/blm-looting-protest-vandalism/

Here's another one from back in 2014, which one of the BLM leaders, DeRay McKesson, made a bunch of students at Yale read: https://thenewinquiry.com/in-defense-of-looting/

So no, looting is in fact a fully approved tactic, or at the very least something they defend in order to cover for the criminal elements among their movement.

On 5/30/2020 at 11:59 PM, notme said:

No, this is their website. https://blacklivesmatter.com/

I don't know much about the organization, but it appears you are mistaken. 

You should have looked at bit more carefully at the website you linked to. Here are some of their beliefs:

Quote

We are unapologetically Black in our positioning. In affirming that Black Lives Matter, we need not qualify our position. To love and desire freedom and justice for ourselves is a prerequisite for wanting the same for others.

We see ourselves as part of the global Black family, and we are aware of the different ways we are impacted or privileged as Black people who exist in different parts of the world.

We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location.

We make space for transgender brothers and sisters to participate and lead.

We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.

We practice empathy. We engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts.

We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.

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.

We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

On 5/31/2020 at 3:45 AM, notme said:

I can and I do. I still support the organization. You do you, but racism overrides all other social issues. 

You can fight against racism without supporting a movement that promotes complete social degeneracy. Just as you can support women's rights without supporting radical feminists. It's not an either or. If there were multiple different approaches during the Civil Rights era (for example the movements of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King), I don't see why everyone needs to get in line behind one particular group now just because they have a snappy slogan. It is however perfectly appropriate for the age we live in, which is all about PR and style over substance.

 

On 6/13/2020 at 2:59 PM, notme said:

^ "Nuclear family" is a recent invention, meant to increase the number of households, therefore increase required consumption of resources. "Nuclear family", that is, mom, dad, and 2 children, is not the only acceptable, nor even the best family structure. Grandparents and unmarried adult children do not need to be their own household unless they prefer it. 

 

On 6/13/2020 at 10:37 PM, notme said:

Pretty much, yes. I was thinking of elders and adult children sharing the family home, but yes definitely "nuclear family" excludes men having more than one wife. Islam allows but does not require "nuclear family". 

This isn't what they mean. They aren't talking about bringing back extended families in the sense of living with other relatives. What they have in mind is for example the 'alternative queer families' that some lesbian feminists constructed in the 1970's, or certain element of family life on a kibbutz. There is a wealth of 'queer' and feminist (not to mention Marxist) literature on deconstructing the traditional family, and this is where you should look if you want to understand their perspective. This is too large a topic to go into now, but suffice to say that when they critique the nuclear family, it's not because they think more people should be living with their grandparents.

[notme 20,630]

@Haydar Husayn I would always rather err on the side of compassion. 

This sounds like extended family to me. 

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.

I am ok with letting homosexual and transgendered non-Muslims live their own lives. It doesn't hurt me or my family. I'm much more bothered by non-Muslims drinking alcohol or engaging in violent behavior, because that actually can hurt people. 

[Haydar Husayn 10,222]

3 minutes ago, notme said:

@Haydar Husayn I would always rather err on the side of compassion. 

Nothing wrong with being compassionate, in fact, it's a good thing. But how does being compassionate necessitate supporting a particular political movement?

3 minutes ago, notme said:

This sounds like extended family to me. 

It's designed to sound ambiguous, but trust me, it's not what they have in mind. Maybe I'll make a separate thread on this, and then it will become clearer insha'Allah. In the meantime, this is probably closer to the type of 'extended' family they have in mind: https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/11/queer-alternative-families-children-reflections.html

3 minutes ago, notme said:

I am ok with letting homosexual and transgendered non-Muslims live their own lives. It doesn't hurt me or my family. I'm much more bothered by non-Muslims drinking alcohol or engaging in violent behavior, because that actually can hurt people. 

There is no issue with letting them live their own lives. The problem is in supporting a movement that actively wants to destroy structures that we agree with. Why would we deliberately support something we know to be harmful? You mention alcohol or violence, but the difference is nobody is calling for Muslims to support an organisation that promotes drinking alcohol or engaging in violent behaviour, and if they did, they would be called out for it.

Then there is the whole issue of a generation of young Muslim activists being influenced by this ideology, which will invariably corrupt their religion.

It's far too simplistic to support a movement just because they highlight a cause you have some sympathy towards. I am against the mistreatment of women, but I wouldn't support some radical feminists that believe in unrestricted abortion on demand and in abolishing the traditional family, just because they used the issue of domestic violence as their rallying cry.

[3wliya_maryam 1,334]

On 6/14/2020 at 10:17 AM, Silas said:

The organization also gets funding from George Soros and Zionist groups

Isn't this a conspiracy theory?

[Mohammad313Ali 1,053]

I highly recommend reading this by Mr. Bilal Muhammad

 https://www.facebook.com/mr.bilal.muhammad/

''It’s is wonderful to see the enthusiasm that the people carry in their stance against oppression and the unjust killing of George Floyd. A fundamental hashtag in the movement against institutionalized and systematic racism within the U.S in particular has been #BlackLivesMatter (BLM). Those who do not advocate the meaning of such a slogan are undoubtedly racist and bigoted.

 

However, let’s remember that BLM is (1) a slogan, and (2) an organization. The slogan is important and true. Those who are currently advocating for BLM have a reasonable cause (in the current state of affairs) and likewise those who question the validity of such an organization can sometimes do so for good reasons.

From an orthodox perspective, BLM as an organization is problematic. Check out their “What We Believe” section on their website. BLM is against black fatherhood, it is against the nuclear family, it is pro-LGBT, and it has no formal position on drugs or gang culture. Its leadership has tweeted about killing men and white people, and telling women to avoid conscientious black men (“hoteps”). BLM has also hijacked Gay Parades and Bernie Sanders events in the past.

Most importantly, we Muslims see a return to God and personal responsibility as the key component in the redress our problems. We see suffering as means of trial, redemption, and chastisement, rather than just a product of systemic oppression. Rebellion and riot is not the standard response to ibtilā’ — the prescribed response is peaceful action, fulfilling duties, prayer, patience, and hijra.

 

We don’t want to create another “whitelash”. Identitarian organizations like BLM are the reason why the alt-right exists, who also use the same frame of identity politics to identify as white nationalists to attack Muslims, blacks, women, and others. Contributing to the frame of identity politics can awaken the sleeping white-nationalist giant in Europe and North America, and awaken far right-wing voices that want to push all minorities away.

Black people still suffer indiscriminately from police brutality, high rates of incarceration, the breakdown of the family, and lower access to education, health care, and high-paying jobs. Some of these issues stem out of policies that overlook African American issues, while others are more social.

Yes, there are anti-discriminatory laws in place, but clearly a lot more needs to be done to redress the race issue - body cameras on cops, judicial reform, and affirmative action in police departments in minority communities are a good step.

 

On top of that, we have to come to terms with the following: Over 72% of black children are born out of wedlock. Fatherless homes lead to higher rates of poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, and mental health problems. We need to be including straight black males, not dismissing them as patriarchal misogynists that are part of the problem. We need to care about them *before* they are shot, not just after. We need to be clamping down on a hookup culture that is destined to plague another generation with broken homes and sexually transmitted diseases. We can’t afford to lose another generation.

 

We should also address racism in our own communities, which is more outward than in the average white community. In Trump's America, we cannot afford to stand alone; we need to do more for our cities and our Muslim and non-Muslim communities. We can reach out to black churches, support black businesses, and join civil rights organizations. At the same time, we cannot fall into the trap of supporting causes that are antithetical to our tradition.

- thanks to Mohammad313Ali for helping me write this post''

[notme 20,630]

@Haydar Husayn I find it better to align myself with groups who I mostly agree with in order to get things accomplished, rather than do nothing while I wait for the perfect group to come along. 

Not only will we be held accountable for what we do in life, we also will be held accountable for what we didn't do. 

[Haydar Husayn 10,222]

1 hour ago, notme said:

@Haydar Husayn I find it better to align myself with groups who I mostly agree with in order to get things accomplished, rather than do nothing while I wait for the perfect group to come along. 

Not only will we be held accountable for what we do in life, we also will be held accountable for what we didn't do. 

Apart from the fact that they are against anti-Black racism, what other things do you agree with them on, that counterbalance the issues I’ve highlighted? And nobody is saying you have to do nothing. It is possible to protest against racism, and to do what you can in your life to fight against it, without supporting a specific organization.  

By the way, can anyone explain what exactly they propose be done about the racism they’ve highlighted? Because it doesn’t make sense to support a group without knowing what their proposed solutions are. So far we have heard things like abolish the police force and prisons. Is that something most people here would support? We hear rhetoric about how ‘all white people are racist’, and how blacks can’t by definition be racist against whites. We’ve seen defences of looting and destruction of private property. Is this something we can support?

We need to get real here, and not be so simplistic to support something based on a three word slogan, when there is a whole agenda behind the scenes that is deeply problematic (or at least should be).

[notme 20,630]

To be honest, the BLM organization in my community has a problematic history. I don't associate with them. 

I'm not prepared to dismiss the entire movement. I do support reduction in militarization of the police departments and using prison as a last resort only. The point is for people to recognize their preconceptions and work to remove them. Systemic racism is real, and it hurts families through multiple generations. We need to proactively work to correct the harm that our ancestors have done. Maybe my folks were always just poor illiterate subsistence farmers and factory workers and never actively oppressed anyone, but people did, and they were people who pretty much looked like me and my family and have a history similar to mine. If I can do something, I could not, in good conscience, do nothing. 

[Salman Haqiqi 145]

On 5/29/2020 at 2:37 AM, Mohammad313Ali said:

Following the tragic death of George Floyd many important matters that have been oftentimes debated, discussed, and brought to light are being amplified.

I am interested in what your thoughts are in regards to BLM and ALM, I believe an analogy that helped me understand the difference between BLM and ALM was when the term ShiaGenocide is used instead of Islamaphobia.

I as an individual really love all inclusive things and words, and I believe that some words such as “white privilege”, “white supremacist”, etc don’t serve in favor of an all inclusive goal or system.

Yes, we can agree that there are some who have suffered greater then others, but we can realize that without shaming an entire race. 

What are your thoughts?

@hasanhh @AmirioTheMuzzy @Muhammed Ali @Ashvazdanghe @GD41586 @Mahdavist @iCenozoic

There is no duality between the two choices. It is true that all lives matter and nobody argues about that, but right now the fraction of all lives that is endangered and oppressed is the black lives fraction.

Imagine that something threatens the health of your hand. You need to draw the attention of your relatives; and so you say "Care about my hand's health!"

Would anyone argue that you should tell everyone to care about all of your body's health and not just the hand?

[Haydar Husayn 10,222]

2 hours ago, notme said:

To be honest, the BLM organization in my community has a problematic history. I don't associate with them. 

I'm not prepared to dismiss the entire movement. I do support reduction in militarization of the police departments and using prison as a last resort only.

There is a world of difference between that, and what they are proposing, which is abolishing the police. As a recent NY Times op-ed put it, "Yes, we mean literally abolish the police" (not to mention prisons). These people are insane and think that if you spends lots of money on social reforms, that somehow you can eliminate evil. This isn't grown-up politics, it's fantasy land stuff.

 

2 hours ago, notme said:

The point is for people to recognize their preconceptions and work to remove them. Systemic racism is real, and it hurts families through multiple generations. We need to proactively work to correct the harm that our ancestors have done. Maybe my folks were always just poor illiterate subsistence farmers and factory workers and never actively oppressed anyone, but people did, and they were people who pretty much looked like me and my family and have a history similar to mine. If I can do something, I could not, in good conscience, do nothing. 

You are of course free to do whatever you wish, but personally I don't believe in collective guilt or punishment. The fact that people who may have looked like you did bad things doesn't mean you share any of the guilt for that. This is one of the issues I have with what's going on at the moment. There is some kind of attempt to impose a collective white guilt on the white population. We are told that race is just a social construct, and that stereotypes are bad, and to not 'pathologize' certain communities by pointing out various internal cultural factors that may be holding them back, but it's completely ok to say that all white people are racist, or that they bear some kind of original sin and need to get on their knees and repent. Sorry,  but I'm not buying it.

And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. [Qur'an 35:18]

 

[notme 20,630]

1 hour ago, Haydar Husayn said:

There is some kind of attempt to impose a collective white guilt on the white population. We are told that race is just a social construct, and that stereotypes are bad, and to not 'pathologize' certain communities by pointing out various internal cultural factors that may be holding them back, but it's completely ok to say that all white people are racist, or that they bear some kind of original sin and need to get on their knees and repent. Sorry,  but I'm not buying it.

It's not guilt. It's an urge to correct the injustices committed by others in the past. If a person can help, they should, in my opinion. It is a community responsibility to lift up those who struggle. 

Each person working alone can only do a little. When we work together, we can change the world. That's why we need to sometimes work with groups who we might not 100% agree with. 

Edited June 16, 2020 by notme

[hasanhh 10,046]

14 hours ago, notme said:

It's not guilt. It's an urge to correct the injustices committed by others in the past.

These are attempts make people 'guilted' into their cultural revolution. As a radio show host said last year, "l will not be guilted into anything."

The "injustices" are not any different than the complaints of the 1960s. What we need to "correct" are these off-the-wall police proceedures. Kneeling on people's necks, tasing elementary school kids, . . . this cwap is crazy.

The biggest problem in the inner cities is the people there know their schools are cwap and all they do is complain and petition. They do not set up after-school schools or cram schools do they?

[notme 20,630]

5 hours ago, hasanhh said:

What we need to "correct" are these off-the-wall police proceedures. Kneeling on people's necks, tasing elementary school kids, . . . this cwap is crazy.

Agree wholeheartedly with this. ^

However, people in poverty don't necessarily have the resources to help themselves. It would help a lot to have better schools and job readiness programs in poor areas, but the fact is schools are usually funded by local property taxes - rich areas have rich schools, poor areas have poor schools. That's another thing we need to fix in order to end systemic racism. 

[Mohammed-Mehdi 1,008]

"1. Black Lives Matter or All Lives Matter"
" I am interested in what your thoughts are in regards to BLM and ALM"

So why are you asking 1 OR 2.
All inclusive goal? 
For a goal you can have 20 sub goals, some at different times, some different from others.

In my opinion this exact title is potentially harmful to our cause, and wrong to have on our public maintained places. 
@Mohammad313Ali

[notme 20,630]

7 minutes ago, Mohammed-Mehdi said:

In my opinion this exact title is potentially harmful to our cause, and wrong to have on our public maintained places. 
@Mohammad313Ali

Sure, but it's a discussion worth having. Let's not be too heavy handed with censorship. 

[Mohammed-Mehdi 1,008]

2 minutes ago, notme said:

Sure

You don't mean sure that is correct.
A discussion worth having is not what I am against. (I really still believe in what I just said in this regard.) 
 

Thank you for your opinion.

 

[hasanhh 10,046]

1 hour ago, notme said:

Agree wholeheartedly with this. ^

However, people in poverty don't necessarily have the resources to help themselves. It would help a lot to have better schools and job readiness programs in poor areas,

but the fact is schools are usually funded by local property taxes - rich areas have rich schools, poor areas have poor schools.  hasanhh: Not true in all states.

That's another thing we need to fix in order to end systemic racism.   

l do not know whatever happened to it, but when we were little, our mother (b.1920) still had the little black 'slate' board she used in school. This is how they took their tests, worked class problems and all on this board with chalk --in both of her one-room, red brick school houses with single wood stoves. The one place is still standing and the other lost to a '74 tornado -l was in this one and the stove was still there.

She went to college in '38. She graduated.

This is a church centric environment and most of them have classroom space.

 

[Moalfas 1,367]

On 6/15/2020 at 7:49 AM, Mohammad313Ali said:

We need to care about them *before* they are shot, not just after.

This is a very good point. Much of what's happening is a reaction to a symptom when we need to confront the disease. If there were equal opportunities for instance, then you'd see less 'black crime'; but when they're marginalised for generations, it's clearly obvious why they're over represented in all the wrong things.

From a bird's eye view, I believe the issue goes beyond colour. America was founded on injustice and any building with a bad foundation won't stand straight.  I think to correct the injustice in America specifically, start with the Natives and keep working your way up. 

[Mohammad313Ali 1,053]

3 hours ago, Mohammed-Mehdi said:

"1. Black Lives Matter or All Lives Matter"
" I am interested in what your thoughts are in regards to BLM and ALM"

So why are you asking 1 OR 2.
All inclusive goal? 
For a goal you can have 20 sub goals, some at different times, some different from others.

In my opinion this exact title is potentially harmful to our cause, and wrong to have on our public maintained places. 
@Mohammad313Ali

Thank you for pointing out the evident flaw in my title brother, I agree as it should not have been as nuanced as it has been displayed. This is due to my ignorance when starting the thread and Alhamdulilah I was able to reach the conclusion that the best option is Black Lives Matter as a slogan.