I am not trying to be a jerk I want to understand why BLM is targetting Bernie and Liberals.

[diabeticman]

Bernie especially has a long political career of fighting for ALL working class individuals. He was a participant in civil rights movement.

Also I've seen post where BLM state that white liberals are useless. It seems that White Liberals and other outraged whites, Latinos and Asians join their protest in Baltimore and Ferguson and other places.


maybe I am naïve but I do try to support people of all races. My wife and I would like to think we are not racists but for BLM to say that we are useless to help them...


I don't know.

[PeaceNikki]

1. There are at least five other threads on the first page of GD that you and your wife could read

which both ask and theorize answers to your question.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

12. And then there's this thread, which is where he did choose to post.

Your permission is not required. Thanks.

[PeaceNikki]

21. Lol, good!

[99th_Monkey]

2. If I take a step back for a moment

from being an avid Bernie supporter, and shake off my disgust and dismay at
how he's being brutally & rudely targeted, while other candidates who are
less progressive on race than are Bernie, are completely ignored by them;

If I take a step back from all that, I think BLM's logic goes something like
this:
A) BLM knows most (or all?) of the other candidates are completely worthless
to them on the issue of race, so why even try.
B) None of the other candidates are drawing such humungous crowds, which
for BLM translates into massive media exposure for their "protest".
C) All the other candidates are highly 'security conscious' and surrounded
constantly by people well-paid to prevent just this kind of assault from happening,
D) Apparently shouting down Presidential candidates is the only tool in BLM's
toolbox for 'fighting racists'

That leaves Bernie alone to shout down, someone who they can safely target.

Why BLM doesn't ask for meetings with Sanders to collaborate with him about
how to advance racial & economic justice (you know, like Martin Luther King and
Robert Kennedy did) is beyond me. Have they tried to do this? If so, I haven't
heard anyone mention it, as I'm sure they would if Bernie refused to meet with
them..

[hifiguy]

3. The issue is an important one

The behavior of those claiming to represent it has been profoundly childish, selfish, obnoxious, rude and incredibly counterproductive.

And I assume they are being paid to engage in such juvenile and assholish acts. Presumably by someone who has a lot to lose as Bernie's visibility rises and his message gets out

[99th_Monkey]

6. There actually are private companies that specialize in this kind of crap

rent-a-mob, rent-a-crowd, etc. which started as only staging flash-mobs or
other public events to manipulate media & public attention while posing as
legitimate "spontaneous" actions by random 'average' Joes & Janes.

This eventually led to these companies selling their "services" to politicians
or political causes. I learned about this from a lengthy interview on NPR with
the CEO of one of these private companies, and it was disturbing to listen to.

Whether this has anything to do with the BLM dust-ups with Sanders, I do
not claim to know. The CEO wouldn't divulge any of his clients when asked.
But this stuff is definitely going on, and probably much more than we realize.

[hifiguy]

9. Not surprising and extremely interesting.

Tnx for a most informative post!

[Betty Karlson]

49. Is that true? That makes me sick.

I thought only Pakistan had rent-a-mob services?

[grasswire]

7. it might have been more productive to go after Obama and Holder

Not only were they elected/appointed because of support from the AA base with expectations that the needs of PoC would be considered, but THEY could actually have done something about the pressing issue of cops killing blacks.

The perfect opportunity exists for change of policy. The bully pulpit is Obama's. The AG is AA.

So why go after a white Jewish senator who has no power to help them and WILL NEVER have the same kind of power that Obama has to influence public opinion.

[99th_Monkey]

20. They can't go after Obama or Hiolder

because they'd get cuffed & locked-up by Secret Service, for one thing.

But your point is still valid, insofar as them being the ones who could
do something NOW, except that Loretta Lynch is now AG.

[grasswire]

34. well......I didn't mean "go after" in the way you seem to think I did.

But there are ways to influence the conversation without invoking the negative attention of the Secret Service. And yes, Lynch is now AG. They did not insist that Holder act, while he was AG, but they could insist that Lynch act now.

[GoneFishin]

37. ... and shouting "racist white supremacist" at Obama or Holder would sound even dumber than

yelling it at Bernie and his supporters.

[Cleita]

11. I was looking back at some analysis of the Dean Scream back in the day.

I came across this article, which is not entirely favorable to Howard Dean, but this stood out to me:

http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/looking-back-dean-scream-72209 Bold letters are mine.

The winner of a presidential nomination contest tends to be the candidate with the most insider support, and Dean simply didn't have that. He had generated the ability to raise money, largely with the help of the Internet, and he could make a lot of noise. But as Iowa demonstrated, he had a hard time translating that support into actual votes.

Sometimes, party insiders converge on a candidate long before the contests ever begin. That didn't happen in 2004. A lot of Democratic governors and members of Congress waited to issue endorsements because they wanted to see how the candidates did in the early contests. Dean's failure in Iowa demonstrated to them that he wasn't a closer. (Contrast that experience with 2008's Iowa Caucus, when Barack Obama demonstrated that a candidacy with celebrity-like appeal could actually translate hype into votes.)

Why didn't insiders flock to Dean? Keep in mind the nature of his candidacy. He described himself as representing "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," suggesting that others were not quite Democratic enough. He referred to the Democratic members of Congress who had voted with Republicans to support the Iraq War as "cockroaches." He notably made enemies of many of the party elites. This is a terrific strategy to generate press but a terrible pathway to win a party's nomination. Party insiders were far more impressed with John Kerry's steady ability to generate votes and his longstanding party bona fides.

I think the same dynamics are in play here. It isn't the Republicans attacking Bernie but the Washington Democratic insiders. They are using issues that are causing civil unrest and letting Bernie lift the whole burden. You notice that BLM is not attending any of Hillary's $2,700 a plate fundraisers. Never mind that Bernie has served in Washington for almost 25 years, he is not one of the establishment Democrats. I think it's time to break up that good ole boys and girls club. Bernie's campaign has to recognize the tactics, meet them headlong and then squash them.

[99th_Monkey]

18. Yes, this is assuredly part of what's going on here

Thanks for the reminder

[nolabels]

25. You can always see the ghosts of these kind of things and folks because of what is missing

And there is a lot missing including an actual real history

[questionseverything]

26. this gentleman says its (b)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017285229

very inspiring video

[99th_Monkey]

29. And he says it well, much weller than me. Thanks for sharing this. nt

[Stellar]

36. ....

Why BLM doesn't ask for meetings with Sanders to collaborate with him about
how to advance racial & economic justice (you know, like Martin Luther King and
Robert Kennedy did) is beyond me. Have they tried to do this? If so, I haven't
heard anyone mention it, as I'm sure they would if Bernie refused to meet with
them..

LOL, first of all, you didn't take a big enough step backwards, if at all.

As I watched MHP show this morning, there was a guy that had a T-shirt on that said, 'this ain't your mama's civil rights'.

They complained that in the past, for years, PoC had meetings with those in Bernies shoes and it came to nothing. If they can't say something in public they definitely will not take it in private. It's alway in the news where Bernie will be because of the large crowds. At this time, BLM number one issue is Criminal Justice Reform....that is number one. And Bernie marched with MLK is not the solution. They want the police to stop killing the children.

[99th_Monkey]

38. "PoC had meetings with those in Bernies shoes and it came to nothing."

Can you back up this claim? Who met with "those in Bernie's shoes"?

And who in the hell are you talking about, who 'tried' to meet with whom?

I notice a distinct lack of any specifics or any sources to back up
your claims, only vague insinuations and insults aimed at the ONE candidate in
this race who really gives a rats-ass about Black Lives Mattering.

[Stellar]

40. Sorry for being vague.

As I tuned into MSNBC yesterday Wes Lowery from Washington Post was already in the middle of explaining that very thing. (I'm doing a search to see if it comes up). And I'm sorry if you felt insulted by anything that I might have said.

only vague insinuations and insults aimed at the ONE candidate in
this race who really gives a rats-ass about Black Lives Mattering.

And, it appears that Martin O'Malley gives a rats-ass in the Ebony and I'm giving it a serious look. Ebony

[99th_Monkey]

47. err ..

ok, now I feel bad. I should not have said Bernie's the 'only' candidate
who gives a rats ass. as that was an unfortunate over-statement. So
it's my turn to say sorry for that. Maybe because I'd had a few

Here's what I actually meant: I'm supporting Bernie for many many reasons,
and on the issue of race & civil rights, I'm supporting him based on his 50
year record of fighting for civil rights for AA's, his 100% rating by NAACP
and the way his candidacy picks up on the unifying theme of simultaneously
addressing BOTH racial equality AND economic justice, as I laid out in my
recent OP here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251505037.

I worked for Bobby in Oregon & California in 1968 myself; and the reason
I went with him over Eugene McCarthy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_McCarthy_presidential_campaign,_1968
was that I saw a video clip of Bobby driving through Watts, and I could see
how African Americans seemed to somehow "get" at a visceral level that this
man really did care (or really did give a 'rats ass' if you will) about racial
inequality, and was solidly aligning his candidacy with Martin Luther King Jr.s
Poor People's March on Washington and it's demands for economic justice.

I'm convinced that it was this very alliance ^ that was scaring the bejesus
out of the ruling class, to the point that the Dark Side resorted to assassination
to put a stop to it. Bernie (who's 2 years older than me) was also active in
the civil rights struggles of that period, and also personally remembers how
all this went down.

So now, 50 years later, Bernie feels compelled to run for POTUS, to pick up
this thread of fighting for both racial equality & economic justice, knowing
full-well the risks he's taking in doing so. I have a huge amount of respect
for his decision to run, for picking up this important thread, for the courage
he's showing in doing so. Given my history, how could I not support him?

On top of this, my reasons for NOT supporting HRC is her complicity in Bill's
'welfare reform' bullshit and his "tough on crime" crusade, that has meant
disproportionately incarcerating millions of Black Americans, a travesty that
is still with us, and needs to get addressed. I can't see supporting O'Malley
on racial justice issues, because I'm more than a little suspicious of his tenure
as Mayor of Baltimore, which has one of the most corrupt & racist police forces
in the nation.

I hope this helps you understand where I'm coming from in my support for
Bernie, over HRC & O'Malley.

[Stellar]

48. Understood. nt

[CTyankee]

41. I am practically certain that he has reached out to BLM.

Why wouldn't he?

Bernie doesn't strike me as someone who would shrink from that challenge...

[99th_Monkey]

50. Bernie's done more than reached out, he's hired Black organizer Symone Sanders

as his Press Sec. She introduced Bernie last night in Portland, where I attended,
along with 27,999 others, and got to hear her passionately speak-out in solidarity
with the goals of Black Lives Matter.

I couldn't find a clip of just her speech, so I'm sending video of the entire rally,
where she speaks at 1:18:20 .. check it out.

[CTyankee]

53. that's wonderful! I love those songs, too!

[roody]

4. It is the only campaign that lets them in the door.

[pnwmom]

5. It isn't. Hillary got harassed at Netroots last time she went and hasn't been there since.

She has been holding mostly small events with supporters, not large events open to anyone. Plus, with her Secret Service, they'll never get that close to her.

And they explained why they haven't been going after O'Malley. Soon after they disrupted his speech at Netroots, he came up with the criminal justice reform package that they've been insisting on. It's the #1 item on his "vision" page on his website.

Also, the Seattle Times article said the police offered to arrest the protesters, but the Bernie group said no.

[Cleita]

13. The fact that she hasn't been there since says a lot about Hillary.

She's knows they won't vote for her, so she's letting them know they aren't important to her. I know Bernie would show up again in spite of what happened at Netroots.

[karynnj]

51. alternatively, she thinks she doesn't have to show

Because either they will vote for her any way or because she doesn't need them in the primary. Knowing the past, she and her team may have seen more possible down side than possible gain.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

8. Because the GOP's "latte liberal" meme has sunk in to a few ignorant goofs "on our side" n/m

[underahedgerow]

10. I'm going to share an anecdote about that.... maybe it'll shed a bit of light on the

issue.

When I lived in LA I had a good friend and work colleague that I paid to do works for me around my house. He moved me several times, did plumbing repairs, moved furniture etc. He was a big black man, older, friendly, gregarious and kind, loved that guy! He was a good friend.

One day in December we went together to the local hardware store to pick up materials for a small project and as usual, he was flirting with the young woman at the cash register.

He says to her 'So young lady, is Santa gonna be good to you this year?"

She replied back to him

'Oh honey please, you know ain't no fat old rich white man gonna come to my hood for christmas!"



It's distrust you see, by the people in the BLM. After centuries of slavery, torture, discrimination, racism, murder and every other atrocity and humiliation, and even with a black man in the White House, little is changed, and it's too little, too late. Now, suddenly the switch is flipped and they're supposed to trust The White Man?

I understand the sentiment and anger, and it makes me angry that PoC still have to do battle every single day against ignorant, racist asshats. It's just not right. Maybe all rich old white men look the same to a lot of people.....

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. Because targeting conservatives is pointless?

Conservatives know that black voters are not going to be voting Republican. Republicans can win without the black vote. Democrats can't. No Democratic candidate has won a majority of the white vote since Johnson in 1964 (and at the same time no Democratic candidate since Johnson has failed to win less than 80% of the non-white vote). http://www.gallup.com/poll/139880/election-polls-presidential-vote-groups.aspx

[sendero]

15. While I totally support..

... to claimed aims of BLM, they are apparently an idiot organization that will accomplish nothing because they don't know how to go after their real enemies.

[hifiguy]

22. Completely agree. Why not ask for a meeting with Bernie?

He's far more open to speaking with regular people than most candidates. Hell's bells, I don't think HRH ever deigns to mingle with the peasantry unless it's one or two carefully pre-screened props for a photo op.

Oh, that's right, it wouldn't get these rude, bratty loudmouths fifteen minutes of fame on social media. What WAS I thinking?

[odd_duck]

16. Careful.....

You are having an instinct/reaction that happens, when something does not 'pass the smell test'.
There are many possibilities at play here, with one being that it is a paid agent provocateur.
I remember all too well with Seattle in 1999 at the World Trade Organization meeting where hired agent provocateurs attempting to incite rioting and turn the protest violent, only to encounter brave resistance from real Liberal/Progressive protest leaders.

I am not saying that this is the case, just a possibility.

[sendero]

17. If so ...

.. the organization could, through "official" channels, simply say so.

[LittleBlue]

19. Divide and conquer

That's why

[99th_Monkey]

23. Who has the most to gain by derailing Bernie's campaign?

Oh that's right. It's people with an over-abundance of money (to pay people
on-the-sly to do whatever they're hired to do) and who are utterly bereft of
any scruples about using deceptive tactics to maintain the status quo.

African Americans in general have absolutely nothing to gain by attacking
Sanders, whose been fighting for racial equality since the 60s.

None of this ^ adds up, but that still doesn't prove anything either.

[Alkene]

46. +1 n/t

[MADem]

24. Why isn't this post about a DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE in GD-P? nt

[orpupilofnature57]

27. Ugly answer is to carry the DNC for the 1%, while looking like the peoples party champion of Women

and Minorities . Look at how human Secretary Rice and Secretary Clinton in the execution of their jobs .

[MisterP]

28. but they're openly targeting Sanders, not using him as a venture to get attention for an issue

the real question isn't whether the other candidates would let them onstage, but why did Portland and Seattle's BLMs use the language they did that specifically TARGETED Sanders, and wildly inaccurately given his record and willingness to work with even BLM

"No lip service. No platitudes. No pivoting to economics ... This old white man and his colorblind economic policies ain't gonna save us y'all." #BowDownBernie "utterly and totally useless (when not outright harmful) in terms of the fight for Black lives. While we are drowning in their liberal rhetoric, we have yet to see them support Black grassroots movements" "Bernie Sanders will not continue to call himself a man of the people, while ignoring the plight of Black people" "without putting out an explicit criminal justice reform package" "You are either fighting continuously and measurably to protect Black life in America, or you are a part of the white supremacist system that we will tear down in the liberation of our people" "white supremacist liberals"

that is NOT the language of a faction (and I do mean faction, since BLM's so big) just seeing a Secret Service-free opening and taking it: they see Sanders as the main problem with politics these days, that he and his supporters are the ones keeping Black issues out of politics; they also rely on liberals closing ranks around them because they're trying to ride the race issue--we're not supposed to question it, or modulate our support, or do anything other than beg their forgiveness

[olddots]

30. I don't think there are plants,shills,agents or even Hillary supporters getting mic time

The nature of our cause is to not have the velvet rope or tough guy security goons ,its about we the people and that goes against the way the bad guys do security and pecking order .We can't get so frustrated that we can't see .

[Maedhros]

31. The thing is, you use protest and disruption to target politicians who are not listening.

When politicians are amenable to your cause, you meet with them and encourage them to actively support it. If they give you the stiff arm, then you protest.

That's why these attacks make no political sense. BERNIE IS LISTENING! And has responded directly and meaningfully to BLM demands, more so than the other candidates. YET THEY STILL INSULT AND ATTACK HIM.

This tells me that the objective is not to raise awareness or institute change, but simply to destroy Bernie's campaign. Thus, BLM has lost all credibility with me.

I will still vehemently oppose police brutality, racial violence and racial injustice - I don't need BLM for that.

[Freelancer]

32. Okay, after listening and reading a lot, here's my take...

Bernie Sanders is collateral damage in a new civil rights campaign. He is right about poverty being an engine of racism. He knows that economic policy is his thing -- part of the equation that he might be able to do some small thing about. Unfortunately, the people protesting don't know what he knows -- that he is virtually powerless to change the hearts of human beings.

The decades-long slide in the levels of white guilt was only exasperated by the election of Barack Obama. Millions of low-information white Americans began openly questioning whether racism still exists at all. Then the outragous killings of unarmed black men started to be televised, and gained traction. Levels of white guilt began to rise again, but how to address the problem remained undefined. Leaders in some quarters of the POC community saw this as an opportunity to shape the dialog in a new direction -- to address militant policing, mandatory sentencing laws, and the unbelievable levels of black incarceration.

Bernie is a target because he represents an older mode of thinking -- that racism can best be dealt with by lifting people out of poverty. There is a crop of new leaders in the POC community that bristle at that, who want to change the entire dynamic of policing, punishment and sentencing. They are intent on having Bernie listen ... on having America listen. The protests keep going out of the hopeful assumption that America hasn't heard, because if it had, something would be happening. The sad truth is that America HAS heard, and the answer is ... NO.

America's answer is (and don't think I'm agreeing with this) if you don't want to be arrested, stop being so black. The whiter part of America, by and large, still thinks that these killings are isolated fuck-ups, and that police are the ones in real danger. That is going to be hard to change, if it's changeable at all. Until they have mixed race grand-kids, or nieces and nephews to worry about, serious change may not be possible. There's something about asking your granddaughter why she's crying, and being told that kids told her "get lost N#####", that changes everything.

[AOR]

33. I'll offer up a half-assed opionion on this...

while trying not to completely piss off every liberal here. It's hard not to piss off liberals from a leftist (anti-capitalism) perspective. Liberals are not leftists. They are capitalists. Liberalism is not leftist politics. Liberalism is capitalism in a "kinder gentler form." From a leftist perspective... the right wing conservatives or whatever want cheap wage-slaves. Liberals want well-fed wage slaves. Leftists want the working class to control their own destiny. Both Conservatives and liberals will defend capitalism as "the end of history" and the only form of social production and social relations possible. Many liberals will red-bait leftists to the point of complete marginalization. This is no secret whatsoever. Many actual leftists have been driven off of DU for years.Liberalism takes credit for social change where no credit is due. The New Deal wasn't the result of liberalism is was the result of organized and militant leftist and labor movements scaring the shit out of the capitalists. Leftists do not believe capitalism can be reformed or regulated to meet the needs of the whole. Leftists believe that liberalism is part of the problem rather than being part of the solution. That's kind of a very short version but I hope that helps a bit. Of course that will be deeply and hotly disputed by those carrying the flag of liberalism.

That being said...I doubt that critique is the main driver of why Black Lives Matter activists are attacking Sanders and white liberals/progressives as racists and useless. From the looks of it... many of the leaders in the movement are in fact liberals and capitalists...Black liberals and capitalists but liberals and capitalists nonetheless. The hypocrisy in that is beyond stunning. There are Clinton and Obama supporters actually claiming the mantle of "leftist radicals." Many here are attacking Sanders while wrapping themselves in the flag of "radical politics." It is far beyond laughable and hypocrisy. Identity politics wrapped in the flag of "Cultural Marxism" is not leftist or "radical." It is a joke and a farce.

There is plenty of room for critique of liberalism when it is coming from an actual leftist perspective. Most leftists don't believe Bernie's "Democratic Socialism" is the answer either and you can find those critiques at many leftist blogs. Those critiques are far from hypocrisy. They are consistent and honest in that no politician can save the destruction of the working class and the poor under the capitalist modes of production and the existence of a ruling class. There is really no room for critique of New Deal politics, liberalism, and "white" progressives when it is coming from neoliberal third-way tools and identity politics hypocrites who couldn't find leftism, class analysis, solidarity, and class struggle if it bit em in the ass regardless of their claiming "radical status." I believe what you are seeing is political opportunism and the rankest of hypocrisy in full glory...notwithstanding the very real and palpable anger of Blacks being gunned down and brutalized on the streets at an ever increasing rate by a police state apparatus created to protect capitalist social relations at all costs.

[Yo_Mama]

35. I don't think they are. Where they can get in to these forums that do not control access

they try to get their issue into the public eyes.

I would bet that if Hillary were having open-access events they'd be there too. She isn't attending these types of events AFAIK.

[joshcryer]

39. Sanders is the most accessible high profile candidate.

He has public rallies that don't have security fences around the podium, you can walk right up there and climb on the stage, etc (that may be changing soon though because what BLM Seattle did was very risky to a high profile candidate).

I think it was mainly a protest of opportunity. Sanders could've had them arrested but he's above that.

I suspect Clinton will get a protest eventually, she's not been having any rallies at all, and they've been rather secure (she does have a big public rally before the nomination is over it'll be impossible to screen for BLM protestors).

[gollygee]

42. What I've heard African Americans in my life say

is that people who think of themselves as liberal white allies talk about being allies a lot more than they actually behave like allies. I think BLM wants to shake us up, and I think they're succeeding.

[RiverLover]

45. They're alienating those white allies, like me. I guess that's shaking things up.

The progressive activists, the people who get out there beside them, that's who Bernie supporters are. That's who they're saying f u to. Makes all the sense in the world.

[alarimer]

43. They are easier to get into.

Republicans control and document their gatherings to the point where even Democrats can't get in to see them. Only registered Republicans can attend, generally. I think Democrats in general have a more open-door policy, so in some sense it is simply easier, as a practical matter. And it may be that Sanders' rallies are easier still. Not sure that Clinton (as a former Sec. of State) is quite so available to crowds. I think Sanders will have to change, though, since this is potentially at least a dangerous situation. Which is a shame really. Candidates need to get away from the controlled, fake environments.

[KittyWampus]

44. The fact you insist on telling us all ONCE AGAIN about Bernie's supposed illustrious career

fighting for racial justice while presumably asking why BLM is protesting at his events means you really don't want to know the answer.

[Thinkingabout]

52. O'Malley sat down with BLM, he listened, I have not heard of O'Malley being interrupted by BLM since

O'Malley go it.

[Go Vols]

54. Seattle's "Outside Agitators 206" & why they want to drive a wedge between BLM and Democrats

We shouldn't judge an important movement like Black Lives Matter by the the excesses of a radical faction within the BLM movement. The instigators of a strident protest who drove Bernie Sanders from a stage yesterday were from a group named Outside Agitators 206. They created a Black Lives Matter Seattle facebook page just 2 days ago. Outside Agitators 206 seems to be a group that regards electoral politics as a inconsequential. They focuses on BLM and driving a wedge between BLM Movement and the Democratic Party. Their facebook page links to a site named Black Agenda Report run by a man named Glen Ford that included this reveling passage:

To succeed, the Black Lives Matter Movement must transform the politics of Black America. By definition, that means declaring war on the Democratic Party, and forcing Black politicians and activists to choose between the Party and the people’s struggle.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/09/1410408/-Seattle-s-Outside-Agitators-206-why-they-want-to-drive-a-wedge-between-BLM-and-Democrats

[backscatter712]

55. Because it's a leaderless group, so any dipshit can claim to speak for them.

And in this case, the dipshit is a Sarah Palin loving, Tea Party moron who doesn't give a shit about engaging with the Sanders campaign, just about disrupting it.

[Deadshot]

56. Well, the woman who was up in Bernie's face is a Sarah Palin supporter.

According to her facebook page.

No surprise there.