I think you severely underrate Farrakhans influence and historical significance. He's been around the spotlight my entire 50 years.

For me it's not just his anti-______ views. He's an obstacle to the place I think everyone here wants to reach.

Equality is impossible thru a lens of superiority. Justice can't exist when you prioritize your "people"/cause above others or worse diminish and even denigrate others. Elevating yourself on the backs of others prevents liberty as does tearing others down.

To have equal footing we must reach a point where we everyone is welcome and invited to share common ground. It's a hell of a lot more work but it's the path to lasting change.

PSUsarge wrote:

pacino wrote:Nah this is cool. I was simply reading the title literally. I also don't like the BLM message getting used for pathetic anti semitic purposes by people and don't want to lump this in with the true message, that's all. It's frustrating to see people with a platform misuse it.

Which is totally understandable, but then IMO it falls on BLM to specifically speak out against this type of messaging vs. going the Malcolm Jenkins route.

Simply ignoring it or dismissing it allows it to continue, as we've seen since the DJax post.

conflating the two will kill BLM. I mean, if they embrace this kind of thinking, I won't do anything to help them. They will lose most Americans and Trump and his like will win. It's fucking stupid and I hope people high in the movement see what a poison pill it is.

That Kareem take should be their response to it.

PSUsarge wrote:

MoBettle wrote:What is Farrakhan's actual power and influence though? I literally never heard of this guy before DeSean’s post. I don’t think you can compare him to the Nazis until his viewpoints actually permeate beyond random celebrities ignorantly posting and liking stuff on social media. I think that’s part of the reason BLM/someone like Malcolm would prefer to approach it as a distraction rather than something necessary to engage on an intellectual level. By doing so arguably gives the guy more legitimacy and creates a precedent to have to respond every time someone comes out with a crazy position that takes the focus off their discrete goals.

Either had I, but that's on both of us because he has a significant amount of influence. Peruse his Wikipedia profile - organized the Million Man March, may have been involved with Malcolm X's assassination, BET poll voted him Person of the Year in 2005, regular references in hip-hop, etc. This guy is not some crazy conspiracy theorist coming out of left field in 2020 without a track record.

By ignoring / dismissing the now-regular public support for him being professed by celebrities with millions of social media followers, we (all, collectively) are normalizing the man's presence and message. Which leads to...

MoBettle wrote:Your point that this is different from ALM in that it is anti-racist is well taken. I’m just very concerned that this touches too close to this expectation that minorities “police their own” in ways that we don’t have for white people or supporters of mainstream positions.

But isn't this what BLM (the movement and maybe the org too) is asking white people (and all people, really) to do, in the name of preventing racism? Silence is violence, being anti-racism isn't enough, etc.

It's difficult for others to hear that message if it's not being practiced by the group asking in a situation where it very obviously can and should be.

MoBettle wrote:Especially for someone like Malcolm who is an individual and not responsible for every dumb thing one of his former teammates posts on social media.

I agree, but when he replies to a current teammate with the below, it's kind of hard to accept a much more tepid response over a similar issue:

"You’re somebody who I had a great deal of respect for. But sometimes, you should shut the ---- up.”

“Even though we’re teammates, I can’t let this slide,” Jenkins said in the post he settled on. “Drew Brees, if you don’t understand how hurtful, how insensitive your comments are, you are part of the problem.”

Thanks, hadn't looked into him much. Still, though, it seems like he was cancelled a long time ago? Like by 2008 Obama's campaign strongly rejected any support from him. It weird that he's coming back into vogue, it almost seems like some sort of 4chan joke that DeSean etc. fell for. It just seems to me that denouncing this guy who they have no direct involvement with is being used as almost like a purity test to confirm BLM or someone like Jenkins have proper moral standing to be representatives of a discrete movement, and I'm not sure if that's fair.

Likewise, I think Malcolm is allowed the right to respond to a colleague that pretty much directly disrespected/misrepresented the actions of Malcolm and his peers without then becoming responsible to sharply rebuke every NFL player that says something offensive about any group under the guise of supporting black people.

That being said I read Kareem's article and it is a pretty strong argument for your point, may need to think about it some more: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... od-1303210

For what it's worth, I intended this thread to be about BLM specifically, as it had dominated the last twenty or so pages of the old civil rights thread and seemed to deserve a thread of its own. Not that I have a problem with it being used for discussion of civil rights more generally.

We appreciate your contrition

This piece from The Athletic staff does a good job summarizing:

This matters not just because the remarkable falsehoods espoused by DeSean Jackson and Stephen Jackson need to be debunked as antisemitic propaganda, but because Stephen Jackson has become a civil rights leader and needs to exercise his power for the collective good. He is speaking not just to his own audience, but to the entire American consciousness. He has the platform and power to make real change through inspiring unity.

When Stephen Jackson held a May 29 rally in Minneapolis and spoke so movingly on the pain of the murder of his “twin,” George Floyd, he became an inspiring face of the Black Lives Matter movement. Whether Jackson wanted it or not, he is now indelibly tied to the fight to not just seek justice for his friend, but also for an entire nation. He needs to hold himself to a higher standard to ensure the success of a mission that hundreds of millions across the world share.

Much of the public discourse on this situation has claimed this is an issue primarily of distracting from the Black Lives Matter movement and therefore slowing its momentum. The problem with this situation is not that it creates a distraction from the Black Lives Matter movement, but that it contradicts its core message and gives ammunition to those who seek to discredit the movement.

https://theathletic.com/1929668/2020/07 ... ed_article

The Answer provides a better answer than most

I had no idea he was so articulate.

JFLNYC wrote:I had no idea he was so articulate.

I mean, I doubt he wrote it word for word (none of these guys do), but AI always struck me as one of the smartest athletes to ever play here, with a truly nuanced view of the world. That's part of what made some of the ways he conducted himself all the more frustrating. I believe the sentiments expressed are genuine.

Augustus wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:I had no idea he was so articulate.

I mean, I doubt he wrote it word for word (none of these guys do), but AI always struck me as one of the smartest athletes to ever play here, with a truly nuanced view of the world. That's part of what made some of the ways he conducted himself all the more frustrating. I believe the sentiments expressed are genuine.

100% agreed. I love that guy and he’s the realest person I can think of. I would never expect him to say something he doesn’t believe due to public opinion.

JFLNYC wrote:I had no idea he was so articulate.

Careful there partner...

Also it has always been clear to me that AI is smart, very smart, and a troubled but also genuine person.

<3

Wolfgang622 wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:I had no idea he was so articulate.

Careful there partner...

Wow. I didn’t think you capable of going that low.

In addition to the way in which many whites are reluctant to confront their own complicity with systemic racism in specific ways like how they navigate their children's education, another issue that I seems to elicit uncomfortable silence is that of reparations. I believe reparations are essential if we are to move close to racial justice. That is, as a moral issue I don't think it's really even debatable. Slavery and Jim Crow were horrific injustices. A couple of years ago I was re-reading part of Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia, whose libertarianism is interesting because it does not at all rely on claims about utility or consequence, it is based entirely on an absolutist conception of rights--no welfare state, public schools, or anything else--for Nozick, taxation is slavery. But it was clear to me that Nozick's political philosophy should be interpreted as one that would recognize that justice requires reparations.

However, I am aware of the extraordinary practical difficulties implementation of reparations. There are lots of cases though from the 20th century where whites used various means to dispossess African Americans of all kinds of property. In these cases, where documentation is sufficient to meet a preponderance of evidence standard, that property should be restored to the descendants of their rightful owners. (Keep in mind there's no real justification that entitles the current property holders to that property--if your grandfather stole something and you've inherited it, you're not entitled to that holding.)

Obviously, though, that's just a start. It is time to start working through those practical difficulties and engage in that conversation and study.

This could be an entire new thread.

No to reparations in the form of direct cash payments. Not that I have strong personal feelings about it. More that they're an impediment to the societal change needed for the equality I desire. Reparations will create further division.

Might not matter with the city council of Asheville clouding the accepted meaning of the word.

Uncle Milty wrote:This could be an entire new thread.

No to reparations in the form of direct cash payments. Not that I have strong personal feelings about it. More that they're an impediment to the societal change needed for the equality I desire. Reparations will create further division.

Might not matter with the city council of Asheville clouding the accepted meaning of the word.

reparations should've happened 150 years ago. agree with milty on the further division, 100 percent. need to move forward.

you have to make a claimant whole. reparations is about money/help. Money is definitely one aspect of reparations. the wealth disparity our society has created is a real thing that needs to be rectified.

Not fair to edit your snark. I'm leaving this anyway!

Didn't expect you to agree. Also thought TV was white.

i figured it would detract and it was just a one-off joke so i got rid of it

pacino wrote:i figured it would detract and it was just a one-off joke so i got rid of it

just bustin your chops