Political Awareness Matters: How Black Lives Matter Are Screwing Themselves -- And the Rest of Us

[FourScore]

Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:15 PM PDT
Political Awareness Matters: How Black Lives Matter Are Screwing Themselves -- And the Rest of Us
by Sean R Shealy

It's time to call out BLM: If you want to change policy, and the racist culture handed down from Washington, you are going to need to win 200 seats in congress, plus the presidency. Would you mind telling us your plan to do that?

Imagine: You are being attacked by a knife-wielding maniac.

"Help me!" you cry.

Suddenly someone hands you a knife.

But instead of being grateful, you look at the person who handed you the knife with withering derision and say, "Really? This little knife? This is pathetic!" And then you hurl the little blade out the window, leaving both of you unarmed and under attack.

This is what transpired at Netroots Nation and again in Seattle, when Black Lives Matter disrupted rallies for Senator Bernie Sanders.

Black Lives Matter needs to understand that Bernie Sanders, and progressives in general, are a minority within a minority.

Regarding Sanders, Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors said in an interview at Netroots, "Your progressive is not progressive enough. We need MORE."

Cullors statement reveals a profound lack of knowledge of the political landscape. In order to understand why this is so incredibly self-defeating, we must first be properly oriented.

This is the American political landscape:

To the far, far right is the Republican Party.

To the center-right is the corporate-mainstream of the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

To the center-left is the Congressional Progressive Caucus – with 68 seats out of 535 members of Congress.

And then, to the far, far left, are Michael Moore, Maxine Waters, and Bernie Sanders.

There simply is no left beyond that point. There's just a waterfall to nowhere at the end of the Earth.

Without rehashing Sander's campaign speeches, he is supporting every possible leftist value there is, just short of calling for guillotines for the American royalists who have overthrown our democracy.

And overthrow it, they have.

America is now an oligarchy. The laws that are being enacted are designed to shovel money to the elite and well-connected at the expense of the middle class and the poor. This includes militarization of the police, draconian drug laws, and the profitization of prisons, all of which disproportionately impact people of color.

Bernie Sanders consistently rails against all of this, and more importantly, he votes against it.

But he loses those votes – because there aren't enough progressives in congress to win them.

Many social media activists like to defiantly shout, 'I don't give a damn about the politics – just fix the damned problem!'

But this is not how government works, nor how policy is changed. What is needed
is a Political Reality Consultant.

Here is a concrete example: On BlackLivesMatter.com, the group has posted a list of demands (all of which sound perfectly reasonable, and by the way, perfectly in line with Bernie Sanders goals). One demand is this: "We demand freedom from mass incarceration and an end to the prison industrial complex."

Black Lives Matter needs someone who will say to them, "GREAT! So, in order to achieve your demand and get the laws changed, you're going to need a progressive president and progressive majorities in both houses. Right now you have Bernie Sanders in the Senate and 67 other progressive votes. So you'll need to keep those seats, and progressives need to win an additional 200 seats in congress, plus the presidency. Now what's your plan to do that?"

Does BLM have any idea how difficult this will be to achieve?

Do they understand that this has never been done before in American history – that progressives have never had the votes to change anything? Every bit of change we've ever achieved has come by changing the culture itself – and that is what we must do again. This is a Herculean task. In the age of Citizen's United, we're up against billionaires who already own all of the media.

The ironic tragedy of what happened at these events is that Bernie Sanders does have such a plan. He took to the national stage, and he's putting forth the values we share as progressives and justice activists. He's getting great traction. If things go incredibly well, he may be elected president.

And then will he change the laws?

No. He can't. There aren't enough progressives even running for office, let alone in office, to change the laws. If he's lucky the other 67 in the Progressive Caucus will keep their seats. But that still leaves us 200 votes short of changing anything.

One of the greatest tools available however, if we can get hold of it, is the Bully Pulpit of the White House. Franklin Delano Roosevelt used it relentlessly to expose the "economic royalists" who were eating America alive for the sake of profit, and preventing all progress.

For two solid years following the election of Bernie Sanders, he'll have a hostile congress, and nothing at all to do … except veto bad bills and point out the people and the moneyed interests behind these bad bills. He'll have all the time in the world to make a case for progressivism to the American people, to inspire progressives to run for office, and to ask for Americans to vote for them. And then, in the next election, we may be able to pick up those 200 seats we need to actually change the laws.

The frustration of the organizers of Black Lives Matter is understandable. But it also has to be understood that the conservative/corporate revolution that has now achieved such entrenched power began when Ronald Reagan gave his first campaign speech, on state's rights, in the town made famous in the movie Mississippi Burning. This was the beginning of the Republican strategy to use race to pit American workers against one another. Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and mass incarceration and Citizen's United all flow from that poison spring. Such is the power of speeches.

But we can give powerful speeches, too. Bernie is one of the best -- and he learned from the best, in listening to, and marching with, Dr. Martin Luther King.

Bernie didn't have to do that. He was a white guy living comfortably in New York. What need did he have to get involved with King, or with the struggle of black Americans?

But he chose to listen, to learn -- and then to help.

If Black Lives Matter wants to have an impact as lasting as King's, BLM activists are going to have to extend the same courtesy to people like Bernie Sanders, and to learn how the process works, and how to do the laborious work of gaining access to the levers of power.

Our opposition is incredibly powerful. We can't afford to lose a single hand -- black or white.

Instead of shouting each other down, let us lift one another up. PLEASE.

\\http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/09/1410138/-Political-Awareness-Matters-How-Black-Lives-Matter-Are-Screwing-Themselves-And-the-Rest-of-Us

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. Watching a particular segment of the Left trying to win the nomination while shitting all over

the most important black civil rights protests of the last 20 years will be fun and interesting.

[ibegurpard]

3. watching said protesters

Call an entire city full of white liberal likely allies white supremacists is also interesting. I'd like to know how they plan to do something about racism without allies.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Cheers

Good luck.

[ibegurpard]

8. And good luck to BLM as well

Black people continue to be assaulted and killed. They use their movement to belittle allies. They are marginalizing themselves and it is tragic to see it.

[alcibiades_mystery]

12. Exposing fake allies in their fakery is equally useful

Making people think about their inch-deep allegiances similarly.

If two or three folks interrupting your idol is all it takes to shit on a protest movement supported by 80+% of one of your main constituencies, well...

[ibegurpard]

16. if you think what happened today

Was going to cause anyone to self examine then you have a very poor understanding of human nature. I really hope there is some central leadership and strategizing going on in the BLM movement because it's too important to be sidelined like this.

[Marr]

88. Oh, there's some central leadership, alright.

As a political attack, this is just too perfect for one specific candidate for me to believe it's grassroots. Hillary's campaign needs to prevent Sanders from gaining black votes, and it's proved all to anxious to use Rovian tactics in the past.

Given the fact that Clinton was the first of the candidates to use the 'all lives matter' line on a national stage, and that she's much higher profile than Sanders and should therefore be a much more appealing target for anyone who simply wants to get their message out, I just can't believe these particular demonstrations are anything but dirty politics from another campaign.

[GoneFishin]

98. Yep. It's a political smear tactic against a candidate who cannot be attacked on any policy issue

because he has stood with the people for 50 years.

[hifiguy]

120. Blammo.

Walk-off grand slam.

Buzzer-beating three-pointer for the win.

This.

Bravo!

The truth and nothing but in EVERY word.

That this is a ratfuck of some kind is so blindingly obvious.

[Warpy]

127. Even if they're just clueless, which might be the case,

this is how they are going to be perceived unless they spread the heckling out a bit. Otherwise, they're just a bunch of "get Bernie" operatives run by people who are not our friends, "friends" meaning any Democrat.

Forcing attention on the continued slaughter of unarmed black males by police as well as the wholesale incarceration of so many black males is vital. Using it against just one candidate in a political primary obscures this message and will get it dismissed as DLC dirty tricks.

[RichVRichV]

20. How is Bernie a fake ally?

[arcane1]

32. It's just another lie. It's all they have n/t

[cascadiance]

60. They're doing a pretty piss poor job of trying to make the case that we are "fake"...

What really is "fake" is any kind of effort they are making to try and work with others that are trying to work with them to further their cause. Don't want to label all BLM people like that, but this is just more than a few of the apples in the cart. If it were some random acts of irresponsibility, I would like to think someone would have apologized for these actions and made better gestures afterward, instead of trying to disown someone that did try to take that step to put a better face on the movement. That just slaps away people that want to do good things for the movement. Both those that aren't POC, and also I suspect many POC that might otherwise want to unite with the movement but rightly don't like the approach that so many are taking now, are both being pushed away now.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

75. Anybody who doesn't like being treated as a wartime enemy is a fake ally.

All right-thinking people know this.

[Joe Chi Minh]

58. Most important black movement in 20 years? Do I hear the cheery sound

of the Pied Piper.

[Katashi_itto]

65. A Hillary supporter speaks...

[LiberalElite]

86. Welll,

they're not interrupting YOUR Queen so that explains the condescending amusement.

[me b zola]

92. What is funny is watching anyone who says they care about black lives

support a candidate that used the southern strategy against Obama in '08. On second thought, its really not funny at all/

[Gravitycollapse]

2. This article is condescending and tone deaf.

It reminds me of the idiotic comments made by the Mayor of Ferguson during protests last year. He spoke to black protesters like they were children.

The BLM is not in the business of appeasing Bernie Sanders or his supporters. They are seeking social justice. And if that means pissing off the self-aggrandizing liberal base, so be it.

[6000eliot]

7. I called a "follow the money" post out on another thread for this very reason.

Why does anyone think that telling black people to sit down and shut up about this is going to help THEIR cause?

[Joe Chi Minh]

62. The effects of the historic civil rights campaign in the sixties seems to have

been petering out, with innocent AA' s being shot daily by the very police who are suppose to be upholding law and order.

Fortunately for AA's - though that sound never so patronizing - they are now being accompanied in their marginalization and persecution by the poorer folk among the white population. The persecution, in the US mysteriously dubbed, 'white privilege', is becoming increasingly generalized - hence the fear felt by the authorities and the militarization of the police. See it as a great opportunity, not an irrelevance.

I can't believe that AA's, who in my opinion are potentially more intelligent than any other race, could shoot themselves in the foot so obviously, as if the wicked have eve been or ever will be vulnerable to their minority and marginalized victims' outraged fury, alone. As Churchill once put it, 'There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them!'

Poor old Ike had a job on his hands in that regard, as well. Monty was a narcissistic monster, but for the sake of Allied success, he continued to tolerate him and prefer him, when the situation called for it. War, as Barbara Tuchman put it, being 'the unfolding of miscalculations', Monty was, on occasions, the least worst choice. That is the perspective that disaffected Dems should take, whatever their colour. A major factor in the Russians beating the Nazis was precisely their numbers. Noise and emotion, alone, won't cut it.

[bahrbearian]

74. Shit down and shut up is BLM's message .

They clearly don't want a discussion.

[GoneFishin]

99. No they don't. What I hear from them is STFU, we don't want to hear from you.

[bahrbearian]

104. They might be saying "Go Hilliary"

[6000eliot]

111. Well, to be fair, "Look what I've done for you people"

is not really an answer to the question "What are you going to do about our children being shot in the streets by the police every day."

[bahrbearian]

124. Its a fair question, but they never allowed an answer. It was sit down and listen.

Then Bow down Bernie ?

[ibegurpard]

10. Yes it is

And so was the protest today. People are going to start ignoring them.

[loyalsister]

38. One thing that I have heard from friends who live the experience

of trying to get people to understand why it's BLM and what their daily lives are like is that white people don't listen. Opon really hearing that point of view it became clear that white people are often trying to make it about them and try to bask in their identity as allies without listening.
One question I asked myself and have talked about with others is as a white person in MO how has my everyday personal life been affected by these protests?
The only way I have truly been affected is by becoming more aware. I am as safe as I was before, while black friends who have known it in ways I have not are observing and feeling a very real threat of open season. Mothers who have black sons live in a kind of fear that will probably never truly resonate with me.
People want to be heard. These candidates are not sitting down seeking an endorsement from the BLM movement. They are talking about their own experiences and good deeds. MLK's anger is relevant, but in the end, being reminded of all that white people gave so generously given, yet knowing that things haven't changed all that much when they are burying their youth and fear for their own and their families lives. I have had conversations where friends have told me that any optimism related to the Civil Rights Act is gone until white supremacy is acknowledged and addressed.

Instead of lecturing, I think it is more productive to acknowledge that there are some experiences that allies cannot understand and to make that fact part of the conversation. Would we see some substantive meeting of the minds if these candidates at least listened to any concrete demands BLM may have? Why aren't they suggesting that we all listen and learn what it is like to live under threat in this country?

I get the cynical side of the politics here, but how often do we see groups led by white people get the attention of politicians during elections. The Sierra Club has some pull along with a variety of other organizations. In the context of BLM, people are sincerely, and legitimately wondering, "what does it take for a movement of POC to get some real attention from politicians?"

People need to take time to listen under the assumption that people living the experience know more and feel more than many of us do.

[LiberalElite]

80. Interesting that the discussion about BLM tactics has morphed into FK the Liberals Hmmm eom

[KingCharlemagne]

84. Reading the article through a certain lens, it suggests that people (the BLM movement) owe

the leader, rather than the leader owing the people.

If Sanders and his supporters -- I am one such -- cannot stand the heat, they should get the fuck out of the kitchen.

[jeff47]

93. Then they won't get what they claim to want.

"Kneel before us" is not going to get them enough votes to actually change anything.

But #BowDownBernie is such a cool-sounding hashtag.

[NuclearDem]

4. As an experiment, replace BLM with OWS.

[pnwmom]

9. Please, please, think before whitesplaining.

BLM made a clear statement today about they want the candidates to do: come up with a strong criminal justice reform policy that will stop the systematic injuries to black people.

That's what we should be pushing for. Not for BLM to shut up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter_55c68f14e4b0923c12bd197e

"Bernie, you were confronted at NetRoots at by black women," Johnson said. "You have yet to put out a criminal justice reform package like O’Malley did."

https://www.facebook.com/BLMSeattle/posts/716844418437393

Presidential candidates will not win Black votes without putting out an explicit criminal justice reform package. As was said at the Netroots action, presidential candidates should expect to be shut down and confronted every step along the way of this presidential campaign

[ibegurpard]

11. No one's whitesplaining now

Calling the citizens of Seattle white supremacists does no favors to a cause.

[pnwmom]

15. No one's listening, either. They made it clear what their goal is and you, among others, just ignored it. n/t

[romanic]

18. What's the goal?

I could not tell because those two women stood up there for twenty fricking minutes and pushed away Sanders when he attempted to speak. Stop making excuses for agitators who don't want their cause to be solved.

[pnwmom]

22. It was in my post. The second link is from their Facebook page.

BLM made a clear statement today about they want the candidates to do: come up with a strong criminal justice reform policy that will stop the systematic injuries to black people.

That's what we should be pushing for. Not for BLM to shut up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter_55c68f14e4b0923c12bd197e

"Bernie, you were confronted at NetRoots at by black women," Johnson said. "You have yet to put out a criminal justice reform package like O’Malley did."

https://www.facebook.com/BLMSeattle/posts/716844418437393

Presidential candidates will not win Black votes without putting out an explicit criminal justice reform package. As was said at the Netroots action, presidential candidates should expect to be shut down and confronted every step along the way of this presidential campaign

[romanic]

23. That's what BLM wants.

But what about what Outside Agitators 206 want? Can you answer that?

[pnwmom]

54. The OP is about BLM.

I don't know what "Outside Agitators 206" want.

But I think Bernie's event organizers should make sure there is a plan for dealing with protesters.

[onecaliberal]

108. Why not ask the current president for those things NOW.

Ask people who have control NOW?

[pnwmom]

109. Obama has security around him that would prevent them from getting that close to him.

But how do you know they aren't asking him?

We only know what the media chooses to report.

[onecaliberal]

114. If they were protesting at the White house

It would be reported. The press loves to give POTUS negative press. No one wants to answer this question about BLM, they have given POTUS a pass on this and I want to know why.

[pnwmom]

116. You think 3 women shouting and waving signs at whatever is the legal distance from the White House

would have gotten media attention?

What they wanted is the mic and the stage, which they would never have gotten at any little White House protest.

[onecaliberal]

118. Look, I completely understand their anger and the

Urgency. Protesting the only person who gives a rats ass, going on twitter and calling him your enemy is NOT going to bring any solution. If these people really want the killing to stop they better figure out how to achieve that without painting an entire party of people who are on their side by the way as racist, when conservatives who are flying the confederate flag don't attract their ire.

[jeff47]

94. "You must kneel before us" is always a good way to get people to listen.

But hey, #BowDownBernie sounds cool, so let's go with it.

[Gravitycollapse]

19. Seattle is one of the gentrification capitals of the US.

White supremacy is not simply a mind-set. It's a form of institutional power. It exists fundamentally in the economic, social and legal structure of this country and is exemplified perfectly in the kind of injustices perpetrated in cities like Seattle.

Lacking awareness of the problem seals one's role as complicit in the white supremacist power structure.

[romanic]

27. White liberals in Seattle don't create gentrification.

Fat cat developers and complicit city government create gentrification. To blame every single white liberal and say their complicit in white supremacy simply for living in Seattle is...quite frankly, ridiculous.

[Gravitycollapse]

31. They absolutely do. Just as white, upwardly mobile consumers do in every city.

It's not enough to blame the developers. The forced emigration of poor minorities from redeveloped intercity communities is due to consumer demand, not simply the will of developers.

[romanic]

33. No.

City governments and developers can easily do rent control and mixed income developments to encourage racial and class diversity in the cities. Yet more often than not, they go after the WASP crowds with money; pushing out both minorities and the small number of white pioneers and artists that usually live in low-income/ upcoming areas.

[Gravitycollapse]

36. You've unwittingly demonstrated my point. They could institute rent control and other things...

They choose not to because they'd rather cater to those with higher incomes. City officials and developers collude to fill their own wallets. But they would have nothing without demand from upwardly mobile consumers and it is just as much the fault of the consumer as it is the developer.

[ibegurpard]

39. Yes many people know this

And calling liberal Seattleites white supremacists to their face is going to help this how?

[Gravitycollapse]

43. Hopefully, it will wake some of them up to their complicity in the white supremacist power structure

[romanic]

49. Oh my goodness

I just can't at this....*throws hands up and walks away*

[ibegurpard]

59. it won't

Insulting people who most likely agree with you on the issue to which you are trying to bring attention will cause mist of them to tune you out.

[Gravitycollapse]

61. More flowery tactics have clearly failed. So maybe something more radical is needed.

Subjugated groups shouldn't have to pander to wealthy white Americans for the proverbial bread crumbs. They shouldn't have to couch their anger and sadness in language that feeds the ego of the privileged.

[ibegurpard]

66. No they shouldnt

But we aren't talking about "shoulds" are we? When you start insulting your audience you end up with no audience. Which is fine if your goal is to have no audience I guess. If you don't want me to join you I wont. I will assume you've got it on your own.

[romanic]

40. Then what is the solution?

Prevent white folk from moving into cities from the suburbs? Separate whites from blacks from living in the same hood for fear the whites will drive up the rent? Prevent investments and grants in black communities for fear it'll make the area attractive and lure in non-black folk?

Regardless, I stand by my opinion that the whole "white supremacist liberals" remark is disgusting and indignant. I'm not interesting in playing the blame game and pointing fingers and participating in pointless in-fighting.

[Gravitycollapse]

42. The solution to gentrification is way too complex for me to fully comprehend...

Let alone explain. All I know for sure is that becoming aware of the problem is the first step to fixing it. And we are quite along ways from becoming fully aware of the magnitude of the problem.

[romanic]

47. So in layman terms: "I don't have an answer."

Figures.

[jeff47]

95. So...I don't know how to fix it, but you guys are awful for not fixing it.

Got it.

[JimDandy]

125. It's illegal in Washington State for any city to institute rent control measures.

So, no, city governments can't easily do rent control. But I agree about the mixed income developments.

And the actual, but unrecognized entities who are creating the most problems with rents, and therefore class diversity in the cities, are property management companies.

[LiberalElite]

81. As a white resident of rapidly gentrifying NYC I can testify that

Gentrification hurts EVERYONE who isn't rich.

[romanic]

14. Enough with the "shut down" shit

Everyone's sick of it!

And enough with this "whitesplaining" accusation. These BLM activists (if they truly are behold to the group) shouldn't expect a pass for their behavior.

[pnwmom]

17. Supporters of candidates should be trying much harder to listen.

BLM is making clear what their priority goal is: reform of the criminal justice system.

Why don't you push for that, instead of telling them to shut up?

[romanic]

21. Sanders listened for twenty minutes.

And was given no window of opportunity to answer. Also, Bernie has talked extensively of criminal justice reform among other economic issues related to criminal and social justice. It's BLM, or rather, their fringe outliers that aren't...or I'm sorry, DON'T want to listen.

[pnwmom]

25. Did you miss this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter_55c68f14e4b0923c12bd197e

"Bernie, you were confronted at NetRoots at by black women," Johnson said. "You have yet to put out a criminal justice reform package like O’Malley did."


Apparently O'Malley has managed to produce a package that passed muster, so the other candidates should be able to, too.

(Hillary hasn't been speaking in venues where this kind of disruption could happen, but she also needs to listen to BLM and produce such a package, if she hasn't already.)

[romanic]

28. No I didnt miss it.

I just don't believe those so-called activists would be interesting in any package Bernie would pull together. They're not interested in anything he has to say, that's the problem.

[pnwmom]

30. They're satisfied with O'Malley's package even though he presided over a

zero-tolerance, get-tough-on-crime policy when he was mayor of Baltimore, that had negative effects on black people there.

So they might not be as hard to please as you think.

[romanic]

34. It's not about pleasing them

Bernie is not being given a chance to respond or speak, how is he supposed to "please" agitators who have no interest in hearing his solutions. You can't win a battle that's already being lost. That's my point!

[pnwmom]

105. There are three choices that I can see. Bernie can either develop a plan like O'Malley did,

so they will stop harassing him for one.

Or he can direct his event organizers to develop a plan to eject protesters, so his events can proceed.

Or he can continue to stop events, as he did on Saturday.

[FourScore]

26. Fine. They can have their protest, but then GET OFF THE STAGE!!!

They kept the mic for 20 f*cking minutes and refused to let Sanders respond. People came to listen to HIM. It was an ambush, not a protest.

Why haven't they done that with Clinton? Why do they keep doing it to Bernie? It stinks.

[pnwmom]

29. Clinton hasn't been having this kind of event. She's been meeting with small groups of supporters

and doing fundraising for herself and other Democrats. She's not going to run into protesters inside that type of event. Once she starts doing them, she'll have Secret Service protection that will keep them at a safe distance.

Protesters at political gatherings is nothing new. I'm kind of surprised that the event organizers aren't doing more to rein this in. Bernie patiently waited for a long time. Instead of having him finally leave and giving up on the event, they should have escorted the women out.

[FourScore]

35. They tried. The protesters tussled with them. Sanders left, probably out of safety concerns. n/t

[jeff47]

96. So...they're unable to block the roads leading to a Clinton event?

Or even stand on the sidewalk holding signs?

[pnwmom]

107. The three women who disrupted Bernie's speech couldn't have blocked the roads

without a lot of help, and they would probably have been arrested.

How do you know there aren't people outside events holding signs? I've gone to a few fundraisers, and there have always been s few protesters (here, they are often anarchists), shouting and carrying signs. A handful of shouters outside an event is unlikely to get covered in the media.

[jeff47]

119. Because BLM is these three women.

And it would be utterly impossible for them to attract enough people to stand in a road.

and they would probably have been arrested.

So they're willing to risk being arrested for assault, but not for jaywalking.

How do you know there aren't people outside events holding signs?

BLM has not claimed to have done so.

[hifiguy]

122. HRH studiously avoids mixing with the common people,

that much is certain. Unless they are pre-screened and hand-selected in the same process the Chimperor used.

[No Vested Interest]

41. Sec.Clinton has full-time Secret Service protection.

Interrupters of any stripe would get short shrift and would be out of the area before they knew what had happened to them.

[rusty fender]

100. If this is their cause, legitimately, then

BLM should be protesting at every Obama speech. He has the bully-pulpit; he can do something about the criminal justice system NOW.

Fact is, Obama has been speaking up about the criminal justice system and has called for reform, but if BLM doesn't think things are happening fast enough, they should put more pressure on him and Harry Reid!

This is why the tactic of targeting Sanders smells to high-heaven of a political tactic by his chief opponent.

And the argument that BLM isn't attacking O'Malley anymore because he has issued his justice reform plan is BS because O'Malley isn't a threat to Hillary, only Bernie is.

[pnwmom]

106. Your reasoning is circular here.

"And the argument that BLM isn't attacking O'Malley anymore because he has issued his justice reform plan is BS because O'Malley isn't a threat to Hillary, only Bernie is."

You are presuming that only a political opponent would have instigated the attacks, which leads you to conclude that a political opponent -- Hillary -- instigated the attacks.

Hillary got harassed at Netroots several years ago, and hasn't gone to that event since. That's why they couldn't bother her there. And she's been avoiding venues like Saturday's in favor of small lunches and dinners with supporters. They haven't been open to the public and that includes the BLM.

Once she has more large events, the Secret Service will be keeping protesters well away from her.

Bernie should direct his event organizers to figure out how to deal with these protesters -- when and how to eject them -- so his events can go on.

[rusty fender]

110. After watching the video of the BLM disruption in Seattle,

I agree with you. It looks to me that these protesters targeted Bernie's event because they knew that they could get away with it.

You can see the people on stage, the ones wearing the lime t-shirts, making sure they don't touch the protesters, but trying still to reason with them. At a Hillary event, once the protesters jumped onstage, security would have wrestled them down and thrown them out.

The Seattle event was not just a Bernie event, others spoke as well. The organizers of the event should have had their own security to prevent people from rushing the stage.

It would benefit future Bernie attended events if the campaign asks for such security to be present.

[pnwmom]

113. The Seattle Times reported that the police offered to remove the protesters from the stage

but that the Bernie people told them not to.

So they made the choice to handle it as they did. But I think they'd be better off making a plan for future events. Protesters are a fact of life whenever politicians speak. At least in Seattle!

[GitRDun]

13. This kos post is complete BS

If the actions of two immature kids has the effect of our society tossing aside a movement as important as BLM, it says a lot more about the society than two screwed up kids or BLM.

DU NEEDS A TIME OUT!

[RichVRichV]

24. Has the BLM movement

issued a statement condemning the actions of these "two immature kids" yet? So far they seem supportive of the immaturity (your word).

And why does DU need a timeout? It seems to be functioning properly.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

77. I think you're agreeing with the 'complete BS post'.

When you says it 'says a lot more about the society', you're saying exactly what the article does - that society is not responding to these tactics as you think society should, that the reality on the ground is not working as those who chose the tactics wanted it to.

It may be 'condescending' or 'tone deaf', but there is a legitimate core point - the tactics being used may not be working as desired, unless the desire is actually to create a more sharply defined wedge between segments of society than already exist.

The latest protesters spoke some truth up there - white progressives have been mostly (or utterly, or whatever the word was) useless in addressing the problems facing black people.

But surely the goal is actually finding a way to actually do something about those problems, and ideally, as soon as possible.

So are the tactics being employed creating such results?

[GitRDun]

83. What I see here is

a rush to hoist BLM on the petard of two kids whose affiliation with the organization is not that clear. BLM doesn't even list an organization structure of any kind on its web site.

a dismissal out of hand of the obvious pain and anguish felt by two young people because they managed those emotions in a dumb way.

absolute certainty over who was a target, what everyone's motive was.

a willingness to relentlessly alert on DU members until they get banned, just because we don't like what they have to say about the Sanders campaign and race.

I'll say it plain. If we toss BLM because of one act by two dumb kids, it says a lot more about us than BLM.

DU needs a time out on this issue...more facts and reflection, less knee-jerk pitchforks.

[daredtowork]

37. Black Posters Matter - On DU!

I was doing Jury Service early and found out that Bravenak's account had been "flagged for review" after being alert swarmed.

WTF.

I mean seriously. WTF.

If we are going to have a discussion about Black Lives Matter, don't we have to open up that discussion first and make sure that Black Posters Matter?

The jury situation I was involved with was someone who was complaining about the Bravenak situation - and even that was low key. He said: "And one black poster was banned for getting real?"

I had to research what he was talking about.

This led me to Bravenak, who had failed to get on the DU bandwagon about Seattle.

As a Bernie supporter, I'm also upset about Seattle. As a Black Lives Matter supporter, I also think it makes their movement look bad. My kneejerk reaction was this might have been a Hillary operation. Someone thought this was GOP provocateurs. Either way it split #BLM from the social left and made them look bad. That was my kneejerk reaction.

But then I saw some of Bravenak's hidden posts. She was bringing the perspective there was some white supremacists among Bernie supporters. When I had asked in another thread what was going on in the actual #BLM thread, someone said that an apology to Bernie had been rescinded: that makes me curious. Perhaps Bravenak was trying to communicate something that was worth listening to. She made other remarks along the lines of how this could have been toned down at Netroots Nation and other ways Bernie could have handled Seattle. Seemed worth listening to rather than HIDING.

What a bunch of Jury Fails. And now Bravenak's account is Flagged for Review. Shouldn't we have some direct insight into the #BLM movement rather than labeling it as disruptive when POC don't say what we want them to be saying to us? Dang.

Is there any way to undo that decision?

Anyway, I still suspect that what happened in Seattle had some political operative prompting. It's just too convenient for Hillary. However, Bravenak's remarks about pockets of white supremacists coming out for Bernie gave me pause for thought -- especially after all the #AllLivesMatter dog whistles used by Hillary, O'Malley, AND Bernie. That hashtag is the dog whistle for a wealthy white supremacist elite who wouldn't regard itself as such - it just assumes white privilege is equivalent to universal and goes nuts pressuring politicians for reaffirmation if that idea is threatened. If that IS the issue, though, I'd question why #BLM is targeting Bernie rather than Hillary. I would like to have Bravenak here to ask.

[TM99]

46. Only some poc posters seem to matter here at DU.

Bravenak needs a well-deserved time-out.

She is outright calling Sanders supporters 'white supremacists'. She has no proof. She says she can see them? Really, and what do they look like? Are we looking for skin heads with Nazi tattoos or what.

Just because she is black does not make her insight any more or less valuable than those of us that are equally black, bi-racial, etc. who are Sanders supporters and question the current very pointed attack on only one candidate at this point in time in this election season.

Now let's correct some of the errors while we are at it. Sanders has NEVER said All Lives Matter. Only O'Malley who made a very big apology and Clinton, who has never apologized for using the phrase, have done so. So if he has never said it, but it is used by white supremacist elites, then what the fuck is the connection. Oh, right, there is not one. So your argument has already failed. He is not using the phrase so that is NOT why he is being the only candidate protested.

The Sanders campaign met with BLM reps after Phoenix. His stump speeches have consistently included since then not only reference to BLM but also policies and ideas to stop police violence and ways to fight institutional racism. He has mentioned ALL of their names in several rallies since then. He has listened, he has acted, and yet now, it is not enough? Why? When will it be enough?

I am bi-racial. I have supported BLM for the get go. I supported their protests at Netroots Nation. But I said then that they need to protest ALL candidates. They need to get O'Malley AND Clinton to make changes as well as Sanders. He has. O'Malley has. Clinton has not. Though a few days ago, she did make passive aggressive public statements implying Sanders is not concerned about racial justice but only economic justice.

So now this today in Seattle. It appears orchestrated. I don't know what yet is going on. Another BLM male rep spoke at the rally for SS & Medicare that was the site of this disruption. One of the women is an extremist black activist. She called all of the white progressives there racists. She wears t-shirts with statements about drinking white tears. She is raging. She has wood to burn. She is not helping the movement or the cause. Something is just not right here. I am not drawing conclusions yet but I am sure as hell researching it further. Something really stinks.

[daredtowork]

52. Bernie was cornered by a radio host the day after Hillary said All Lives Matter

She basically bullied and harangued him for that sound bite. I believe Bernie was also trying to take some of the heat off Clinton in his usual big and generous way. It also ticks me off that Hillary did not take any real heat for that #AllLivesMatter comment, while she got to be conveniently absent from Netroots Nation.

As I said in my post, I also think this Seattle disruption is suspiciously convenient for Hillary's campaign, and it certainly should be further researched.

That said, when I look at Bravenak's posts I don't see her guilty of much more than having a different opinion. Even if you are a fellow POC, I don't think there should be any pressure to agree. In the posts I saw she wasn't calling all Bernie Sanders supporters White Supremacists. The drift I caught was that pockets of Bernie Sanders Supporters were white supremacists (though I believe #AllLivesMatter might be addressed from the elitist as well as the Southern white poor side) and that Bernie had somehow not followed up on this at Netroots Nation, and he had also not given someone the chance to say a prayer at the start of his talk. Her posts that had been Juried weren't actually disruptive, so whether you think she deserves a time-out or not, she was Alert-mobbed for this particular "time-out".

I feel this is dissent-suppression: it would be better to know how people who are plotting such disruptions might be justifying them.

[TM99]

64. There is zero proof that any Sanders supporters

are 'white supremacists'. That is either hyperbole or a smear.

And Sanders has followed up on the criticism level at NN by BLM there. Please research here for recent discussions of this.

I don't really know what the prayer deal is about. This particular event was not his rally alone. He was simply a speaker among many on the anniversary of Social Security and Medicare.

And if she is calling supporters white supremacists without proof or valid cause, then yes, it is very disruptive. This is not dissent-suppression. There are plenty of disagreements on both sides but I do not see such hyperbolic name calling being used without juired consequences. She took the risk. She lives with the consequences. I can respect her for other posts and viewpoints, and I can still very much disagree with her hyperbole today.

[daredtowork]

70. What hyperbolic name calling?

The people calling out "white liberal supremacists" were the Seattle #BLM folks - Bravenak was citing them. She was even imitating their speech with all the "y'alls".

I've continued to research this in the Primaries thread. I did misunderstand what Bravenak was referring to, but she still should have been listened to, and it was still wrong to Hide her for trying to explain what a very real thread in the #BLM movement.

The #BLM members in Seattle are also members of a Black Power/Identity movement called Outliers something. They do strongly believe that the root issue is racism and white supremacy, and that Bernie's economic causes are a distraction from that. Whether that group/belief just happens to play into Hilary's hands or can be used by the GOP to place a wedge in the Democratic party is a different story - but that group exists.

There is a similar group in California called By Any Means Necessary that was generally blamed for driving most of the vandalism and violence of the Ferguson-sympathy protests last Falll. They issued very strong rhetoric of violence against the police, coordinated blocking highways, and may have fomented some mobs. However, it was also apparent that police or government provocateurs could infiltrate protests and then easily blame vandalism on this group once they had acquired a bad reputation.

It saddens me that this is happening to #BLM.

Regarding Bravenak, I hope you can separate what she was trying to tell you about from her own beliefs. And even if she did personally call DU out on being a bunch of "white liberal supremacists" (which I didn't see) in the name of #BLM, I still would have been intrigued under the circumstances and would have wanted to know why she felt that way and why she would support the disruption of a Bernie event.

[TM99]

71. I know you are defending her, and I applaud that on the surface.

But no, her posts went too far by community standards. Them's the breaks.

Yes, I am aware that those BLM members are also apart of a more extremist group. I have been a part of civil rights activism among other causes since I was a very young man. Extremists can hijack a worthy political activists message and actually cause greater harm than good. I personally would like to hear a response from the BLM leadership on this particular instance.

The video and photos show excessive rage, hyperbolic and insulting speech, and actual bullying of Sanders and the others in attendance. If this kind of thing continues, it is going to cause great harm to the BLM movement. We need it. We need loud and strong voices. We also need allies. We also need politicians with strong history of support fighting with us. The question now is will we have that? Will we get that? What next?

[daredtowork]

117. I hope we hear a response from leadership as well

The question is - can anyone claim to be that leadership? As several have pointed out, that was part of the downfall of OWS.

I agree with your general points about #BLM - I've been a strong supporter of that movement, and I've been particularly worried about the obsession of white liberals with establishing "All Lives Matter" as a humanist idea and principle of universal reason - I've been constantly having to re-explain #BLM to no avail to people who should be strong allies. I suspect there IS pressure, not from White Supremacists but from White Intellectuals Who Think They Know It All, for political representatives to signal "All Lives Matter". This gives a very real "White Liberal" presence among us for #BLM to be talking back to: we just don't recognize it when they use they use the term "White Supremacy" because we associate it that with lynching and the confederate flag. The "white supremacy" they have in mind is the more subtle kind that ultimately stems from white privilege, and that is abetted from using white as the default color of "the universal".

Definitely worth talking about. Definitely worth a critique. I've had numerous arguments with very smart white liberal acquaintances on this matter who surprised the heck out of me by saying "All Lives Matter" (and who were in a position to be providing subtle political pressures regarding use of that term).

NOT worth disrupting Bernie Sanders events when that is his only method of conducting his campaign in lieu of having any money. And he's been disrupted twice now! There needs to be an unwritten rule that all candidates need to be disrupted an equal amount with equal ramifications before another round starts.

Regarding Bravenak, the posts I looked at just did not rise to a level of a time-out. I've been on a lot of juries and DU sets the bar for language low and the bar for free speech high. I still see Bravenak as primarily guilty of dissent and being a lightening rod for messages that people don't want to hear.

Hey, I don't want to hear them either. As a Bernie supporter, I dislike this "divide the economic from the social" stuff, and it benefits Hillary's camp so much that I suspect her or a wealthy supporter of bankrolling it at some point in the discourse stream. And it even annoys me on DU when someone claims to be a POC speaking for ALL POC and insists that problems of race are free-floating and non-caused by the economic despite poverty and employment discrimination being two of its outstanding features. (This actually totally baffled me until today when I saw there was a meme about problems of racism being buried under general economic problems - the fact that #BLM is trying to prevent that needs to be articulated more clearly).

Despite the annoyances and disagreements, I'd rather have he information and debate in front of me on DU than in some back channel where it will total catch me by surprise later.

[dgibby]

128. Not to mention physical contact

which in some states could result in felony assault charges. The protesters kept saying that Bernie's supporters were white supremacists, but I grew up in the segregated South, and believe me, if they'd really been W.S., those protesters would have been pulled off the stage and beaten to a bloody pulp. Either they don't understand what real W.S. are/do or they knew they were lying when they were hurling those accusations.

Either way, they've certainly done a lot of damage to their cause (if they really are members of BLM, which I hope they're not, as it's a vitally important movement).

[TM99]

131. Yes, definite bullying!

I grew up in the south as well, the eldest son of bi-racial parents.

I would like to see the BLM movement disavow such extremists from within their midst. I am not holding my breath that they will do so.

[tiredtoo]

72. Came here this morning to see if

the BLM group's attacks appear to be focused on Bernie Sanders. Reading this thread only confused me further. Hopefully TM99 will post conclusions after doing more research.
Thank you for your efforts.

[Joe Chi Minh]

73. Yep. Something about it all fishy. Since when have right-wing Dems been

more favourable to the cause of persecuted racial minorities than left-wing Jews.

The Jews, themselves, know a thing or two about racial bigotry and discrimination, all have very long memories. And let's not forget, Jew-haters claiming it's only Israel you hate - Israel is a small island of civilized behaviour in an ocean of the most barbaric, terrorist 'crazies' - admittedly partly created by the US, who now, however, seem to be financially sponsoring them, when not attacking them by air!

[LiberalElite]

82. -and the discussion

here has morphed into Fuck the Liberals, it's all their fault for not trying harder.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

79. A couple of things

At least one of the hides on bravenak (a response to one of my comments) was bogus in my books. I can't comment on others, but I saw that one, and it should not have gotten an alert or hide.

Second, I actually am pretty sure I remember Bernie saying 'all lives matter' a number of months back, but not in response to a protest, rather as part of a followup statement after one of the many deaths of black people at the hands of police. So it might not be correct to say he has 'NEVER' said it, but I think it's true that he hasn't made that particular faux pas any time recently.

[TM99]

85. Four in one day usually suggests a melt down

even if one was bogus. But enough about her.

No, Sanders has never said 'all lives matter'. This is why I am pissed about this. Tell lies often enough, stretch the truth often enough, connect Sanders to 'all lives matter' frequently enough and your response is typical. You are pretty sure but not sure. If he maybe said it once then he is just like the rest, just not recently. I have searched a lot and no examples of this come up.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

87. I'm 'pretty sure but not sure' because it was a long time ago

and trying to search Bernie and 'all lives matter' gets buried in recent articles about the NN15 event.

And, because back when he said it, there simply wasn't a lot of media focus on it actually being a faux pas, it was just another statement among many by various politicians.

[TM99]

89. No it wasn't a long time ago

and it did not happen.

BLM came into existence in 2013, a mere two years ago. The movement gained far wider media attention in 2014 with the death of Michael Brown. Sanders was one of the first politicians to speak out against it.

All lives matter and 'our lives matter' were responses on Twitter after that.

I am sorry but only Clinton and O'Malley have used the term all lives matter.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

78. I saw that bravenak's reply to one of my posts got alerted on and hidden.

And I'll go on record that I thought it was a totally bogus alert and hide.

[RichVRichV]

115. I've seen lots of unfair hides on people of all opinions on this site.

That's why my default stance is to not hide when I'm on a jury.

If there's a lesson to learn from Bravenaks timeout it's to not agitate a mob. A lot of people were angry over what happened. Instead of backing off and letting people cool down she decided to throw fuel on the fire and got burnt by it. It may not be fair but it is what it is. She doesn't have exclusive domain over anger.



Now that being said, while some of the hides may have been bogus the last one wasn't. When you quote someone you strongly agree with you take ownership of the quote. She called Bernie supporters "liberal white supremists". That deserved a hide (and probably a timeout by itself).

[Paka]

44. Amen to every word.

That was stated so beautifully. Thank you for posting.

[Lancero]

45. Sometimes being told 'shut up' is a sign that you're doing something right.

This is one of those times.

[FourScore]

48. Not when it's and entire park full of people screaming it at you.

Then you're probably in the wrong.

[Lancero]

50. That the park would rather scream at a protest against the mass killing and incarceration...

Of African Americans rather then the killings and incarcerations themselves is rather telling.

And really, the entire point - If it wasn't for BLM protesting these actions, candidates would push them to the wayside.

[FourScore]

51. The protest lasted over 20 minutes...They tussled with the organizers...

People took time out of their daily lives and got off work to hear Bernie speak, but never got a chance to hear him because the protesters REFUSED to let him respond...Bernie's life could have been in danger for all we know.

The tactics were crass and alienating. People all over the internet are saying that they stand with the cause but not with the method. It went to far.

Why don't they crash a Hillary event next time?

[Lancero]

53. Who knows? Perhaps Hillary is doing something diffrient then Bernies campaign is?

You know what the crowd did at his speach?

Right as the protests walked on stage the mainly WHITE crowd called for them to be arrested. Before they even started talking, white people - completely afraid of what they had to say - immediately cried out for the police to remove them.

They called for four and a half minutes of silence, symbolic of the four and a half hours that Michael Browns body was left to lay in a street... The crowd responded with profanities, likely including quite a few racial slurs.

Sanders was given a chance to stand with the protesters on stage. He refused, choosing to stand on the side, and later to leave all together.

He was given a chance to stand together with them - A example of the unity he loves to talk about. He refused to do so.

[FourScore]

55. For security reasons, they never should have been allowed onstage.

Of course people wanted them to leave.

And why do you keep bringing up the crowd's race? Imagine if I said the same thing but called the crowd "mainly BLACK" - in large caps, of course.

They called for a minute of silence and dragged it out to 4 and a half minutes.

He left when the organizers tried to take the mike and the protesters started tussling with them. He has to consider his own safety.

Why should he stand with them? He had no idea what they were going to say.

Have you even seen it? It was waaaaay out of line.

Hillary isn't making speeches or public appearances right now. She also has massive secret service detail.

[Joe Chi Minh]

63. Unity will not be achieved by a minority hectoring and seeking

to impose its will on an established power-block, itself fighting on the back foot against a corrupt electoral system. The perfect is the enemy of the good. Had those BLM people not already shown their hand on another occasion? Their m.o. was already well-known by the whites.

If the attitude really is, 'Well we're oppressed and you haven't done a whole lot to help us up to now, so we'll mess up all your prospects of success in life, too,' I can understand that, even if it is nihilism writ large. But there is certainly nothing positive to commend it; other than the satisfaction of an ever-so-slightly, warped bloody-mindedness, for which I must confess to feeling a certain tenderness.

[Gravitycollapse]

67. "We're being murdered in the streets and you haven't done a whole lot to help us up to now."

That's what they're saying. Not merely that they are along some continuum of oppression but that they are fighting to literally survive.

[Joe Chi Minh]

76. Yes. I realise that, but I think Bernie would be by far the least compromised

candidate, and as concerned as the best of the other candidates to 'knock on the head' the murderous free-for-all many racist police forces now engage in on a daily basis.

I love the Clintons from the days when they were 'under the blackjack' of the decidedly unstellar Kenneth Starr, but it seems to me that Hillary would be compromised on many level by her and Bill's close association with certain Republicans and large corporations.

As regards Obama, I think being an African American President has energized the racists, which in turn has made it more difficult for him to tackle the racism in the country, most importantly of course in the police forces and judicial system. Though I believe I have read of initiatives he or his latest Attorney General 's have taken in the matter.

But as you say, it is insane the authority to murder with impunity an innocent citizen, which a single racist policeman is free to exercise, in many places across the US. Well, certainly the South. It's just that that doesn't change the number or scale of optimal options available for tackling the matter. Patience under such an ongoing daily threat can only be desperately hard to maintain. I certainly understand that.

[jeff47]

97. And their tactics are saying "Don't do anything about it for at least 16 months"

Even if they believe Sanders would win the election, Sanders can't really do anything about it until January 2017. Any bill he introduces will be killed by the Republicans.

There happens to be this other guy who already is president. There happens to be this woman who is attorney general. Anything they want Sanders to do in 16 months could be started by those two people, right now.

Yet, only trying to disrupt Sanders events.....how odd.

[MFrohike]

56. A slightly different perspective

This protest was a complete disaster for both Sanders and BLM. It will likely hurt him quite a bit, as he's going to have to try to minimize accusations by association of racism and white supremacy. It doesn't take much to make mud stick and I suspect this will do it because flashpoints tend to harden pre-existing associations. The protesters in Seattle made a colossal blunder. If you make the movement itself the topic of debate instead of its goals, you're unlikely to get past that. The fortunes of both Occupy and the tea party over the last few years should have made that abundantly clear.

I don't think either party is going to do well after this.

[Joe Chi Minh]

57. A brillliant article. What an apt metaphor - the guy

throwing away a knife because he considers it too small.

I wonder if these types are actually monied middle-class AA's , who would prefer a more corporate-docile candidate, and, much more speculatively, might even be operatives.

[mnhtnbb]

68. I doubt that MLK, Jr. would support the tactics of BLM protesting Sanders

if he were alive today.

OK, so I'm an old white woman, what do I know? I just think BLM has another agenda
because it makes absolutely ZERO sense to me for them to antagonize what Howard
Dean called the "Democratic wing of the Democratic party" and they are the folks
who are supporting Bernie this time around.

Great way to chase the most progressive candidate out of the race; we all know how that turned out
in 2004.

[dembotoz]

69. 2 things 1 blm--- try that at a walker rally. 2 Sanders needs to fix this

We r supposed to be on the same side... Tho in all honesty I skew more O'Malley.
We can not start playing games like this

Just can't

[CanonRay]

90. Bravo!

Well said.

[MineralMan]

91. Whitesplaining, pure and simple.

Never effective, really.

[romanic]

101. Whitesplaining is such a useless term

Add something to the convo besides a juvenile insult.

[6000eliot]

112. Especially if you are white.

[m-lekktor]

130. especially coming from the biggest 'SPLAINER on DU. nt

[RKP5637]

102. We need to all stand united, not divided. Otherwise, there is NO future for all of us! n/t

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

103. Yes, everything needs to be perfectly controlled

Carefully select your audience. Carefully position blacks and women behind the candidate. Deliver well scripted jokes.

We demand total control of the process!!!

This is actually what happens in America when you're authentic.

Go Bernie!!!!

[hifiguy]

121. Couldn't agree with this more.

[Marr]

123. Weird how so many of the same voices that faulted OWS for not having a central, single goal and

an identifiable leader; the same voices that said their choice to simply shut things down instead of engage in the political system, are totally fine with people shutting down the speaking engagements of the only actual, viable liberal Presidential candidate we've had in this country in decades.

I just can't reconcile it. Whatever could be the common factor in these two seemingly opposite positions.

[JimDandy]

126. Yup. n/t

[Fumesucker]

129. I've been noticing that for a while