I've moved around a couple of your statements this is because they were kinda addressed in the same point or I felt they should be addressed separately. I assume anyone who has read this far has read the full post.
No problem, it's always good to discuss matters and argue, with someone who's views are different from mine. I hold no grudge here.
Who's forcing anyone? Nobody is forcing you to engage in this conversation, nobody is being forced to read what I write and nobody certainly is being forced to agree with me as you have shown. I have no power, you can technically ban me from the forum although I think that would be an egregious abuse of that power. What I am doing is challenging poeple's in my (and many others) view incorrect assumptions about BLM. Everyone is allowed thier opinion but that doesn't mean they shouldn't challenge if they are wrong.
The way you came across, could be constrained that it's impossible not to get behind the movement, and in essence forcing people to commit to something they don't want to. It's good that you are challenging people's minds on this matter, you are passionate about this, I get that. But just because they disagree with you, doesn't make them wrong. Both parties can have parts of being right, maybe not in totality, but partly.
You'll notice the bit where I said most countries? That's because I accept this is mostly European/North American (minus a couple of countries and probably plus a few in other areas usually countires with majority white-European populations) problem. Your mixing a simple problem with a simple solution. Does it target black people more than white people which is disproportionate to that actual population demographics? We have to accept that as basic fact before we can say why? and how? Denial of that problem stops us from coming up with solutions and its a core issue because I have so many conversations where refuse to belive there are issues and its all gone away.
Yeah, I get that you said most countries. I'm trying to add more paint to the picture, as it's just not as cut-and-dry as you want to make it. It has nothing to do with denial, it's more about personal experiences and history that is giving us a different point of view.
Well your in denial of basic issue of does racially aggrevated violence effect black people I apprciate in SA things may be diffrent but its certainly an issue from where I'm from (where the players are making a living) and America and those facts are pretty much undeniable unless you really don't want to belive there is an issue. It makes it very hard to have a conversation if there is denial of a problem in the first place,
The thing is though, BLM in USA is about police brutality against black people. In South Africa it's not about police brutality against black people. It's not denial, it's how the movement has changed since it was started, and what it's core value was, and how other nations are using this movement to campaign their own racial agenda.
Authoritarianism is never a good answer to any problem, I believe you tried it before. Ah well that is an opinion but can't say I like any authortarian states escalation of arms/powers never seams to work the way people want it to, We bought the army in to deal with the Irish and that worked so damned well....
Authority is governed by laws, and police have policies and procedures in place as to how to operate in every scenario. I wish the South African Police Service was as well trained as the american police officers. Hell, I wish our police officers was in the same physical shape as the American officers. in USA they have coffee and donuts. Over here they have KFC, and by the BUCKETS.
Escalation of arms/powers is again unique to each country. We have very strict gun laws, and you have to have a competency certificate, and have a license for each gun you own, and each person is limited to 4 guns, unless you are a registered hunter with a professional hunting license.
It also excluded the rights to be in possession of assault rifles. And only people in the security industry, police and military may carry assault rifles.
We bought the army in to deal with the Corona-virus... Each country use their powers of authority differently...
Go watch the full video of George Floyd's arrest and ask yourself whether the actions were close to acceptable. If you think they were sorry I've lost all respect for you and I have no respect for anyone who thinks it was. It doesn't matter any factor to his previous record. The officers may have reason to subdue a suspect but he was quite clearly subdued long before his murder. If you think its acceptable or there isn't fair outrage because he was conviction for armed robbery I don't think you really believe in a fair justice system. And that is kind of the point the police in this instance had no reason to believe Flloyd at the time was a threat to them or members of the general public but did feel it okay to take his life. In some ways it has to be him because it is someone with a bad past because even though he had one he still didn't deserve to die.
I guess us saffas, who have seen worse acts of brutality, not just by police, doesn't see the level of brutality is the same way you do. We are receiving weekly articles with graphic content as to how innocent, elderly people who cannot defend themselves are brutally raped and murdered on the farms in SA. It's horrific.
The general opinion of violent criminals in SA is that they should not be wrapped in cotton wool. and be given any leniency on sentencing. Our prison's are overcrowded, We don't have the death penalty, our police are inadequate and the poor and vulnerable keep on suffering.
There is no justice here. Yes, George Floyd should perhaps not have been handled or treated how he was. But we have seen plenty of instances over here, where the police try to subdue or arrest a violent criminal only for the criminal to launch an attack and/or have some of his own friends surprize the police and open fire. Plenty of police die that way.
The other thing is that sometimes these criminals are under the influence of some sort of drug and they are not that easy to subdue or arrest. I've seen with my own eyes how a guy, wanted for rape, had to be held down by 5 officers while they tried to handcuff him. He was superhumanly strong, for such a timid figure, and the police just could keep him down. even when they put him the holding cells at the police station, he was still as high as a kite and tough to get to the cells.
Again, personal point of views...
This is not a new movement either, Kapernieck was kneeling long before this ever happened and was sparked by the extra-judicial of Mike Brown and Eric Garner back in 2014.
You should retract the remarks because you haven't proivded any evidence to us just that you "read it". You complain about wikipedia which requires citations from good sources for the postulated facts within its information but can't be bothered with the same burden of proof yourself..
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
I remember the whole NFL taking a knee thing. But then again, taking a knee on the footbal field, means you are taking a down, if I'm correct and letting time go by??
If BLM was just about police brutality on black americans, I would happily support the movement, without taking a knee.
But BLM has evolved, and I've said this in previous posts too. And I just can't support this movement for what it has become.
www.nytimes.com
