Black Lives Matter rejects show of support from the DNC

[think]

Source: The Hill

Supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement are distancing themselves from a Democratic National Committee resolution voicing support for their cause.

The Black Lives Matter Network said the resolution the DNC adopted at its summer meeting last week "in no way implies an endorsement of the DNC" by the group.

"The Democratic Party, like the Republican and all political parties, have historically attempted to control or contain Black people’s efforts to liberate ourselves," the group said in a statement Sunday.

"True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets and led by the people, not by a political party," it added, suggesting later the DNC was a "self-interested ... political machine."

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/252303-black-lives-matter-rejects-show-of-support-from-the-dnc

---

Black Lives Matter statement:

Black Lives Matter

Sunday, August 30, 2015

The following is a statement is response to the Democratic National Committee resolution expressing support for the Black Lives Matter movement, and can be attributed to the Black Lives Matter Network, including our 26 chapters nationwide.

"A resolution signaling the Democratic National Committee’s endorsement that Black lives matter, in no way implies an endorsement of the DNC by the Black Lives Matter Network, nor was it done in consultation with us. We do not now, nor have we ever, endorsed or affiliated with the Democratic Party, or with any party. The Democratic Party, like the Republican and all political parties, have historically attempted to control or contain Black people’s efforts to liberate ourselves. True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets and led by the people, not by a political party.

More specifically, the Black Lives Matter Network is clear that a resolution from the Democratic National Committee won’t bring the changes we seek. Resolutions without concrete change are just business as usual. Promises are not policies. We demand freedom for Black bodies, justice for Black lives, safety for Black communities, and rights for Black people. We demand action, not words, from those who purport to stand with us.

While the Black Lives Matter Network applauds political change towards making the world safer for Black life, our only endorsement goes to the protest movement we’ve built together with Black people nationwide -- not the self-interested candidates, parties, or political machine seeking our vote."
####

source:
https://www.facebook.com/BlackLivesMatter/posts/488330528004864

[Archae]

1. The more I read about many of these "BLM" activists, the more I dislike them.

They sound more and more as time goes on like Louis Farrkhan or this latest "New Black Panthers" group.

Militant, and racist towards anyone not black.

[DustyJoe]

3. Yep

Last edited Mon Aug 31, 2015, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Looking more like 'La Raza' just for a different race.
exclusion for a different race, others need not apply.

On edit: removed my offensive 'racial purity' term (replaced it with exclusion) as not part of the op

And looking at it, comparison to La Raza probably is not apt as that group
leans more to a cosmic 'one mixed race' rather than single race exclusion.

[JustAnotherGen]

6. Where did they state 'racial purity'?

Can you show me where you got that from?

[DustyJoe]

9. retract

Bad choice of words when attempting to illustrate exclusion
speech based on the premise 'anyone not like us need not apply'

I will edit, thanks for pointing out my lousy choice of words.

[JustAnotherGen]

10. No - that's fine

I think those of us who DO support them need to be vigilant. I.E. Make sure that we support their goals and objectives and that they aren't taking this approach.

[tularetom]

4. Yeah, much as I enjoy seeing the DNC get kicked in the ass

I'm afraid these folks are going to wind up losing rather than making friends for their movement.

And I'm not even sure there is agreement among their membership as to what their specific goals/obectives are.

[840high]

12. Agree.

[blackspade]

17. No, not at all.

Their agenda does not include making white people comfortable
They are advocating for the lives in their communities which naturally will conflict with those in the white community who think that Black people should be more grateful for the 'help' that they are given.

[JustAnotherGen]

5. I can respect that n/t

[shawn703]

7. It's not hard to see where they are coming from

Good for the DNC stating they support BLM, but why should this translate into BLM endorsement of the DNC? Yes, the goals of BLM probably align more closely with the Democratic party than the Republican party, but the truth of the matter is Black Lives have continued to be in jeopardy regardless of which party is in power at any level of government. BLM wants and deserves results, not more rhetoric. Actions will save Black Lives, not empty words.

[lsewpershad]

20. Right on.

[AuntPatsy]

27. Good post

[loveandlight]

37. exactly

I've listened to some of the leaders speak and am very impressed by their political sophistication. They do not want to get gobbled up in partisan politics. They have their issues and that is what is most important. Good for them. Many movements have been co-opted too easily. I applaud them for standing their ground.

[MuseRider]

8. They are doing what they think they need to do to accomplish

their goals. I admire them for being out and loud about it.

However they see the issues right now, hell forever here in the USA, they have continually have had to fight for equality. No matter how much we want to think we did that already I think most of us would agree it is not so.

It reminds me of the saying, "Well behaved women rarely make history".

[sufrommich]

11. The headline is a joke.They didn't "reject" anything,they

simply stated that they aren't affiliated with any political party.Anyone with a grain of common sense already knew that.

[bread_and_roses]

13. Good for them! The DNC's only objective is winning elections

They are right, and justified. How often have most Ds addressed institutional racism? The appalling prison pipeline? The violence against people of color? The ravages of the drug war? How many have been brave enough to actually call out racism?

[lib87]

18. *crickets*

I agree.

There have been some congressional democrats and president who have called out these issues but it will take many of them coming together to make changes. Grass roots groups can influence them.

[loyalsister]

25. And the bottom line with BLM

is to put a stop to the killings and make broader changes. If there were some kind of legislation that would demand greater accountability among law enforcement, it would not matter one bit to the people affected who signed it, just as long as they did.

[cyberswede]

14. The DNC *is* a "self-interested ... political machine." nt

[William Seger]

15. I was OK with it up to this point:

> "True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets and led by the people, not by a political party," it added, suggesting later the DNC was a "self-interested ... political machine."

... and it isn't the DNC slam that I have a problem with.

I believe the primary struggle here is to change attitudes. I believe the primary issue is justice, which specifically requires changing the attitudes of our police, judges, public officials and lawmakers, which is the first step in changing their behavior. No doubt, people in the streets will change attitudes, but not necessarily in a positive direction, so I think BLM needs to be careful of striking the most productive tone. Refusing to endorse (much less be led by) either major party is a good idea, I think, and so is requiring specific policy action plans from politicians, regardless of the fact that virtually all politicians are parts of some political machine. But, I think the BLM should endorse individual political candidates who come forward with an agenda over those who don't or only offer lip service.

[blackspade]

16. I see nothing wrong with that statement.

They have every right not to be co-opted by political parties.
While on one hand the DNC endorsement is good, but it is also an attempt to fold the BLM movement under the DNC banner, potentially toxic to any grassroots social movement.

[loyalsister]

24. I agree

The explicit goal is for Black lives to finally matter so much to the majority of all USAers that their well being and lives are important enough that people from all political stripes find these killings at the hands of police reprehensible.

It is smart and in the best interest of people of color for BLM to not affiliate too closely with the enemies of politicians who have the power to help make the needed changes.

It was a Reagan appointee who led the disability rights movement, and a republican president who signed the ADA. Serious activists know that in movements there are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies.

[secondwind]

19. These people are nuts.. they are self-defeating

[Zorra]

21. Recommend. nt

[m-lekktor]

22. I agree with this.

[HereSince1628]

23. Personally, I hate the smell of 1967 in the morning

and the afternoon, evening and the overnight.

I hope when they take it to the street it is to do something different than I watched back then

[Scootaloo]

26. A lot of stuff happened in 1967. Could you be a little more detailed?

[HereSince1628]

29. The Detroit riots

http://time.com/3638378/detroit-burning-photos-from-the-12th-street-riot-1967/

[Scootaloo]

31. I fail to see the commonality between the Detroit riots and BLM stepping back from the DNC

Can you explain?

[HereSince1628]

33. Sure it's the words in their statement, as posted above:

"True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets...

[Scootaloo]

34. Hardly resembles a call to riot.

Rather that change isn't going to "come from the top" - i.e., a political party.

[HereSince1628]

36. I didn't say that, now did I? I said that I hoped they did it differently, -didn't I

Too da loo Scoot a loo

[onecaliberal]

28. They're right.

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. Granted ... I haven't read the thread; but, I'm willing to bet ...

somewhere in here someone is going to yell, "It's a trick ... a part of the HRC machine!"

[Scootaloo]

32. Looks like you lost a bet.

Besides, didn't you know? They're playing for Team Bernie now.

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. Well ... it's there ... It's just implied and "dog whistlish" ...

[Scootaloo]

39. Still sore, huh?

Hey! Did you ever get a copy of "Malcolm X Speaks"?

[1StrongBlackMan]

41. Not sore; but still laughing ...

I read it on-line AND i think I apologized to the original poster of the quote that I questioned.

[Scootaloo]

43. Cool n/t

[cheapdate]

35. Whatever. Crack a history book sometime. Talk to someone

who took risks and made sacrifices before you were born to win black people the right to vote and get a better education. Yes, we still have deep and serious problems and young people have the right to figure out things on their own. But I think that turning away allies is stupid and self-defeating. And there's an element of disrespect for elders that's borderline churlish.

[romanic]

40. It sounds more like BLM activists want to form thier own little party

If that's the case why even demand anything from political candidates and politicians in the first place?

[TipTok]

42. If that is the case, they likely want some power and authority to go with it...

... which will come from the folks who already have it.